By on February 15, 2013

The 2013 Range Rover may be sold out, but anyone ordering the base model or the HSE may regret getting their order in. The 5.0L naturally aspirated V8 will be replaced by the more efficient and nearly-as-powerful 3.0L supercharged V6.

At 340 horsepower and 332 lb-ft of torque, the V6 is down about 35 horsepower and 43 lb-ft of torque. The 0-60 run will take .6 seconds longer, but gas mileage will be up by 2 mpg in each category. Most importantly, the people buying this car will likely not notice or care. If they’re that status concious, they’ll get the full-bore Autobiography edition.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

32 Comments on “Base Range Rover Loses 2 Cylinders...”


  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    It’s a caricature now. I’m very disappointed in the styling direction. The 03 was a great improvement over the 96-02, which was a downgrade from the 75-95. Now we go back down again, with chintzy detailing and Escalade-style pandering.

    The Range Rover can go away now, it’s stopped serving a meaningful purpose.

    • 0 avatar
      redliner

      On the contrary, it does indeed serve a purpose. Just not the same purpose it served thirty years ago.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        Like I said, meaningful purpose. There were plenty of gaudy posemobiles already.

      • 0 avatar

        I personally don’t see what all of the hate is about. It’s still a lovely vehicle. Perhaps the design was a bit dimmed by the fact that Ford beat Land Rover to those inverted-L-shaped exterior lamps by a year or two on the Explorer. But that design is still cohesive and still honors the Range Rover brand. After all, it’s a lot less cluttered than the Cadillac Escalade, Infiniti QX56, Mercedes-Benz ML, or even the 2013 Lexus LX 570. The fact of the matter is that the Range Rover nameplate is so equitable–and people are so shallow–that they could have slapped it on anything and still made a killing. I applaud Land Rover for creating a respectable, good-looking vehicle, as the same cannot be said for some of the other luxury automakers. If you want to see a real example of a “caricaturized SUV”, check out the transition between the first and second-gen Lexus GX…yikes!

        As for the other part of your comment, it isn’t a poseurmobile because it is still capable of doing everything that it suggests. It may no longer be an agricultural, countryside farmer’s truck, but how profitable would that be, really? I think you’re drawing ire less from the Range Rover itself and more from the types of people that own drive them–as is the case with most of the commenters on this site.

        On a completely unrelated note, I wonder how many takers there’d be if Land Rover offered us the diesel six-cylinder that the European market gets…

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        Nope, not about the people driving them, it’s about the fact that it’s historically unreliable, too heavy, overpriced, AND a caricature of design.

        It’s no longer elegant. The GX didn’t start out as elegant.

    • 0 avatar
      chas404

      Just be glad it is not FWD with 4 cylinder turbo ala Jaguar and mercedes. Luxo cars are seemingly downgraded from before. You think a guy dropping $75k or so for one gives a care about 2 mpg?

    • 0 avatar

      I agree most of the folks buying the base range rover will not notice the difference.

  • avatar
    AMC_CJ

    I know Land Rovers are ruling hunks of crap, with pretty much no true off-road capability whatever (sparing the Defender, of course).

    But I always liked them, just based on the styling. They where the only true 2-box blunt-front SUV really left on the market. The interior was simple, the exterior gorgeous; if I had that kind of money to blow on a vehicle, I would have, crappiness be damned.

    But now this. It looks awful, and I’m thankful of it. Because finally, the Range Rover looks like the god awful piece of crap it actually is, and I have been relieved of temptation. Thank you Land Rover.

    Now only if every beautiful train-wreck of a woman showed what a horrible piece of crap she was like the new Range Rover does.

    • 0 avatar
      thelaine

      +1
      Holy crap. We must have been separated at birth. Get out of my brain CJ.

    • 0 avatar

      -1

      There; you’re back at zero.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      @AMC_CJ
      I hate to disillusion you but a Disco 4 with the 3 litre Lion engine is an extremely capable vehicle.

      I don’t know of one US SUV that could out perform it off road. Maybe a G Wagen, or a 200 Series Landcruiser would give it some competition.

      The same I would have to say for the Rangie.

      I used to own a 95 Cherokee Sport, it was very good off road, its just a pity it was in the workshop with warranty work for 6 of the 15 months I owned it.

      I went out and bought a 97 3.2 diesel Navara and it went and never stopped. Not a good off road as my Jeep, but I never needed to be towed out for a breakdown.

      The Defender is a better 4×4 than a Wrangler. Where I live you wouldn’t even think of using a Jeep for any off roading, it’s Japanese or Land Rover.

      Maybe the uber rich will use a G Wagen or our Defence Force has them.

      • 0 avatar
        AMC_CJ

        What performs better off-road?

        I think I’d put my CJ7 Renegade up against about anything this side of a Unimog. After the CJ Wranglers did get pretty soft. A new one with a diesel would be pretty good; I have that same Diesel in a Liberty, why they never put it in the Wrangler is beyond me (as they did, and still do, overseas).

        Still, I like the Range Rover, or at least the idea of one. I’ve heard nothing but bad things about them reliability wise, and being a mechanic myself, I work on all my own vehicles, and prefer to keep things a bit simple as I don’t get paid to work on my own stuff.

  • avatar
    thornmark

    Let’s see real world tests. Hopefully the engine will deliver, unlike Ford’s EcoBoosts which combine slower performance and poorer gas mileage in the Fusion than competitors, according to CR.

  • avatar
    Chocolatedeath

    Come one you guys are being way to hard on RR. There are so many vehicles right now that dont serve the same purpose as they once did or at lest appeal the same crowd as it used too. Exhibit A: 25 years ago the 3 series catered to a much different crowd than it does now. But if you were paying attention it stopped serving that crowd over ten years ago. Poser indeed.
    Exhibit B: Honda Civic, I wont go into details here but you good and damn well the same kind of folks that bought that car in the past aint buying it now.
    This automobile started a sector of sales that nonone really thought of before. Off road lux. Its gotten to the point that even the Jeep GC has followed RR footsteps. The Land Cruiser followed several years ago and even Yota admitted that if they hadn’t changed it to a Luxo vehicle that they would have stopped making importing it to the US.

    I have always loved this even when it was a refrigerator on wheels. Had a poster of one up in College with it driving across the Sahara.
    I may never ever get to own one and I most def wont be driving one across the Sahara, but if its the end of the world I know what dealership I am headed too to loot. If they are all gone the the Jeep GC or Land Cruiser will do just fine.
    Nope the closet I will get to this thing is a Ford Flex with ECO boost. I wont be able to climb Rubicon with it but they are damn nice ride. That serve a purpose.

    • 0 avatar

      I agree with this so much. And moreover, you all cry foul because you think that these manufacturers have made their cars chintzy (and sometimes, as with the 2014 Lexus IS, you’re absolutely right). But the reason a car looks ugly to you and almost no one else isn’t because you have better eyesight than the general-public; it’s because you have different tastes.

      Get over it.

      And your comment, Chocolatedeath, reminds me of one of the scenes in the “Left Behind” book series in which the world was indeed ending and one of the main-characters went out and bought a brand-new, loaded Range Rover, specifically because of its offroading prowess…

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      Oh please. Since the very first 1977 e21 3-series was introduced, they have been bought by 10% enthusiasts and 90% badge whores. Has been the same ever since, and the same whining with every single new generation.

      Similarly, the Range Rover is the same as it has ever been, other than those first few years of 2dr vinyl interior farm trucks. Once the Royals started buying them, their days as farm hacks were over. But the capability is certainly still there, once you put proper wheels and tires on the things.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        When I was shopping for a new BMW in spring of 1988, you had to order an automatic 3 series. All the ones on the lot were 5-speeds. Think about that when you’re tarring the people that bought the BMWs that weren’t over-styled, gadget-filled gin palaces.

      • 0 avatar
        Athos Nobile

        I’ve seen quite a few Sport here with proper lift/wheel/tyre and… mud.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        @CJINSD

        Even the e30s were nearly 50% automatics in the US, and that was back when people still bought stick shift cars in general. So you must have been shopping at a pretty special dealership. My local dealership stocks manuals, people in New England buy them. Fewer now that the slushbox is a no cost option though. Sigh.

        My e91 is a far cry from being a “gadget-filled gin palace” though like you I prefer the pre-Bangle styling. Luckily I can’t see what it looks like from the inside. Still a better drive than anything else out there in its class.

  • avatar

    From what I have been reading, Tata Motors are in a losing spiral, they might not be around for long, I suggest they are looking for a “White Knight” to take these vehicles from them, time will tell eh?

  • avatar
    Flybrian

    I am literally looking down at an invoice from 10/14/11 for a 2012 RR Supercharged that reads $104,700.00 and then glancing up to see that vehicle in front of me that was purchased by us at Manheim Orlando for $72,800 two weeks ago – and what that tells me is that the people who acquire these things brand-new have zero care about the 2MPG benefit and only know that V6 < V8, which is true.

    Also, after driving several iterations of the Range, I get it. I really do. But I still don’t get the price tage, especially since my $104k paperweight represents the MID-LEVEL trim.

  • avatar
    Tick

    I don’t like subtle styling cues on this car like the ______________ or the ____________. I also can’t afford one so therefore I will post a longwinded diatribe about how this car is a total piece of ________ that used to be cool back in the _____’s but now is just driven by ____________ and rich ___________s. I can’t believe people pay $__________ for these! The manufacturer has lost their way but boy if I were in charge things would be different. Not that I actually have any ideas based in reality, because I’ve never ran a profitable lemonade stand, let alone a car company. Well, time to log off my computer at work and drive my underpowered brown __________ to my tiny apartment in __________ and stuff my face full of ____________ while I play Forza.

    EDIT: Sorry Derek, I couldn’t help myself. Feel better soon.

    • 0 avatar
      Athos Nobile

      Very true and I laughed out loud just by figuring how to fill the blanks. Thanks for that. You forgot the B&B part which would have made it a flawless victory.

      You and jaykato and maybe even krhodes1 should have post some of those comments in Baruth’s LR bashing piece a couple of months ago.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    It’s just a piece of crap in a shiny wrapper, driven most likely by a shiny rapper full of crap. No matter how nice they make the interior and engine, the electronics have a mind of their own, which unfortunately has schizophrenia.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Mu buddy had a 2005 HSE back in the day and it had nice fit and finish, was crazy quick for such a big vehicle, and it rode very plushly. It was a POS in terms of reliability and he sold it within a few years primarily for that reason (absolutely dreaded entering the “warranty no mas” zone).

    The new, lower end, faux-posery ones only hit one of those three attributes, and are a stain on the heritage of the make. The Evoque is the scarlet letter in this vein.

  • avatar
    Lorenzo

    Considering how these vehicles are used, what is lost by driving a Ford Flex AWD with Range Rover logos?

  • avatar
    jaykato

    You know, despite all of the comments,it appears that all or most have never actually owned a Range Rover. They’ve all “seen” or “heard” or “had a buddy” or more probably read about them on that pure bastion of truth, the internet.

    I’ve had one of each: a ’95 LWB , ’00 4.0 SE, ’04 HSE (still have it with 150k) and presently a 10 Sport SC. Sure, the first 2 could have been more reliable but they weren’t the horror shows that everyone suggests. If you were capable of more than changing a wiper blade, most issues could be resolved without a dealer visit. Once BMW took over with the 03s and up, then Ford and now Tata with the Jag motors, they were/are no worse than most other vehicles. Is a Landcruiser more reliable? Sure, but look at it and in it. Capable and made well without question but c’mon, it’s a big Camry. If you want a luxury SUV, (I’ll leave alone the question of whether anyone actually needs one), and don’t want something from the 80s (G-Wagen, no offense), there really isn’t any other choice.

  • avatar
    j0shuak

    I just got back 1 hour ago from Rausch Creek, one of the premier off roading spots in the north east. Our group consisted of 2 lifted & mud tired JK rubicons, a lifted & mud tired JK Unlimited (me) and a 2006 LR3 with beefy all terrain tires. The land rover did awesome. We give our buddy a lot of grief, calling it a Cadillac, but in all seriousness, it did great and I’m sure his ride home (after the off roading ended ) was 5x more comfortable than the rest of us in our JKs. (I wouldn’t trade my JK for the LR3, but I totally see the appeal of it.)


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India