By on September 2, 2014

land-rovery-discovery-sport-02

The uproar over the Ford Explorer’s move to a unibody, car-based platform was deafening, largely led by a chorus of internet know-it-alls who found it convenient to be outraged when it meant the opportunity for clicks (and were otherwise contemptuous of anything with a raised ride height and two box shape). No such outrage has been present for the new Land Rover Discovery’s err, crossing over.

I never cared much for the Disco, the LR3 or LR4, as they came to be known. Former EIC Baruth adored his ’97 5-speed Discovery, but where I grew up, they were little more than glorified carpool taxi, never seeing terrain more rugged than a gravel driveway.

The move to a unibody platform makes sense, no matter how hard the Land Rover faithful (or non-buying purists) might protest. Land Rover, like many great marques, has come a lifestyle brand, albeit with far less merchandising than some other premium nameplates. The newest Disco is a great accoutrement, and probably a very nice vehicle, if JLR’s latest crop of cars is anything to go by.

Its biggest flaws will be that

  • A crop of non-buying know-it-alls finds it unsatisfactory due to its lack of off-road chops
  • For many self-conscious buyers, it won’t be the most expensive Land Rover products, thus making it a shameful “poverty spec” alternative to the Range Rover lineup

Ironically, the very point of the Discovery range (as it will now be called) is to fulfill both of those mandates. No matter – since the Explorer moved to a more car-like unibody design, sales have increased each year JLR will sell plenty of Discos too.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

86 Comments on “Discovery, We Hardly Knew Ye...”


  • avatar
    thelaine

    You could never take this useless pile of crap on safari. Cancel my order.

    • 0 avatar
      esskeyess

      This is a Freelander/LR2 replacement-not a Discovery/LR4 which is your safari going truck. Discovery will be a line of 2-or 3 vehicles. Real Discovery/LR4 replacement expected in a couple of years and this-Discovery Sport . Think RR,RRSport.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        Right, this is an Escape size crossover. But the RR Sport, which is LR4 size, went unibody so the LR4/full size Discovery will also.

        Even the Defender replacement is going to be unibody.

        There is no functional reason for BOF in this market, but LR/RR is going to have to be very careful to maintain a reason to buy a unibody LR/RR instead of a unibody Ford.

        • 0 avatar
          racer-esq.

          When the Freelander came to the US in 2002 it started at $6,000 more than an Escape. Now the Defender Sport is going to start at $17,000 more than an Escape.

          Land Rover is going to have a hard time with that gap. Especially with the Jeep Cherokee also coming in much lower, and even the Germans coming in lower.

          I suspect LR/RR sales numbers in the US are going to get much closer to Jaguar sales numbers.

    • 0 avatar
      JD321

      If I were a rhinoceros, I would probably try to phuk it.

      This is a Freelander replacement.

    • 0 avatar
      JD321

      If I were a rhinoceros, I would probably want to screw it.
      This is a Freelander replacement.

  • avatar

    I had a 2004 Eddie Bauer V8 Explorer back in 2005. Loved it for a lot of reasons. I hate SUV’s, but being a drummer, I needed it. And I liked a lot of the options and conveniences it had. It also never failed one me.

    It also had the shifter on the stalk. Or on the tree. Whatever you want to call it. The center console had plenty of room for things. This wasn’t a sports car, it was an SUV. A People Hauler.

    So why the fuck are they placing a stupid, useless shifter in the middle console just so you can go from Park to Drive, eating up useful, valuable space for something you use… not that often to get moving? What the hell is this crap. My biggest complaint on the modern Explorer is having this useless waste of space in the center console. I don’t get it. It’s stupid. Put the shifter back on the steering column and give me space to put my phone, big mac, super 7-Eleven gulp, glasses, laptop, ipad and cigar on.

    Seriously, why is there a center console shifter there in these things.

    Oh, and anyone I knew with a Disco always had problems, what a piece of garbage.

    • 0 avatar
      geozinger

      I had a similar epiphany about automatic shifters in vans, suvs and the like. I rented a Grand Caravan a couple of years back which had the shifter high on the dash. At first it was strange to see it there, but after a while it made perfect sense. Shift levers aren’t really attached to the transmissions anymore, plus many cars have paddles for shifting, so why bother with them? I really like the rotary shifters that Jaguars and some Chrysler products have, too. That seems like a good idiom.

      • 0 avatar
        Signal11

        Well, if you’re still producing manual models, then it makes sense that you put mount the shifter on the center console or floor, otherwise you’d have to do a column mount shifter. I don’t know if you’ve driven any vans with column mount manual shifters, but they’re a pain in the ass.

        While neither the Range Rover nor LR4 come in anything but automatic, this is after all a company that sells on tradition.

        I don’t mind any of the major three positions for automatics – dash, column or center console. I did mind the Merc E350’s POS electronic column shifter, though. That thing was not fully thought out.

      • 0 avatar

        Nissan’s minivan has the shifter up on the dash very high, leaving space for usefulness on the center console. Great work they did there.

    • 0 avatar
      Arthur Dailey

      Driving a stick I certainly do not have that complaint.

      And being old enough to remember driving around in push button automatic Chryslers, I still have a fear of ‘electronic’ button or knob style shift controls.

      That being said, I am not advocating going back to having a manual shifter ‘on the tree’. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt and never liked the feel or ergonomics.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    So there I was, today, stuck in slow moving, but moving, traffic (at about a 15 mph clip), when I looked around me and noticed a literal wall of CUVs EVERYWHERE.

    It was depressing to see these square boxes, some more angular, some more square, some short, others long, but square boxes all the same, moving in unison as a rolling brigade as a seeming Borg collective of uncanny, dull, unimaginative, passionless cubes, walling me in on all sides.

    And there were no less than 4 Land Rover/Range Rover products at various times, including the mutant gene Evoque, with its head hazard rear door entry slope – a glorified Ford complete with 4 banger hamster mill at that (apparently designed as the faux-luxury ornament it is by Mrs. Beckham, at least in large part).

    The new Land Rover Discovery Sport literally looks like a rebadged Ford Explorer, too, EVEN AFTER A FORD EXPLORER PULLS UP.

    DEPRESSING.

  • avatar
    stuki

    Looks like a 200% scale subcompact. Like a swollen Fiat 500.

    I once thought Land Rover ownership moving to India would result in cars better suited to the average road quality in that country. Perhaps forgetting that the only people in India who can afford one, wouldn’t be caught dead outside their own well paved, gated community….

    Well, at least now, Toyota can build the next Land Cruiser on a Camry platform, safe in the knowledge that they’ll still have the most off road worthy status gas guzzler on the market…

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I might agree with theLaine on this, but I don’t know how well this new Disco will perform off road. In Australia we are probably the biggest country with safari style off road holidays, it is a huge pastime here. Great way to travel.

    I did consider a Dico 4, but ended up buying a pickup instead. I like the Rover range of 4x4s. Very capable and true off road vehicles with comfort and style, only the Japanese can match or come close to the Brits with decent 4x4s (discounting the German’s with the AMG 6×6 G Wagen pickup, the greatest pickup ever made or even the G Wagen in any form).

    Is this aluminium like it’s more expensive brother the Rangie?

    The engine choices will again probably be very similar to the Rangie.

    I don’t really have much against monocoque constructed vehicles over full chassis. I did own a terrible 95 Cherokee Sports.

    I’m waiting the read how this fairs against the likes of a Landcruiser and Patrol off road, even throw in a G Wagen.

    But, it’s biggest competitor will be it’s own Rangie. People who tend to buy these are Angliophiles who support Britannia. But does Britannia still rule in these off road vehicles? I would bet the Japanese do now.

    The US doesn’t build any vehicle to compare against these for off road travel. Maybe the States should do something and manufacture a decent off road SUV. The Grand Cherokee is great, but it isn’t a prestige or luxury vehicle, it competes with the lower end of the SUV market.

    http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/new-land-rover-discovery-previewed-20140415-36oh1.html

    Range and Land Rovers have become much more reliable over the past 15 years or so. To like one is similar the the Jag fans or even Chrysler Jeep fans.

    • 0 avatar

      Its interesting AUS and NZ have such low regard for Jeeps here the are the overwhelming choice of offroaders (rapidly;y becoming true in europe as well) I also see the grand cherokke as not a premium vehicle being interesting. I believe the avergae transaction price is the highest of all of Chrysler mainstream vehicles. A co worker (who owns an overland GC) mentioned the other day that the Gym he goes to in a very wealthy suburb is always full of new GC where a few years ago it was Rovers and x5’s it seems to be considered an upscale vehicle (here in CT most people tend to be a little less showy about wealth so that may be part of it) Oddly enough most of the really wealthy people I know here in CT have Grand Cherokees in the Garage.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @mopar4wd
        It’s interesting to read your comment. You’ve obviously have never been in a prestige vehicle.

        The Grand Cherokee is a nice vehicle for the cheap end of the market here in Australia. It does sell relatively well.

        But you must realise that in Australia this style of vehicle is very limited in what it can do, even as a suburban hack. It is smaller than the other true 4×4 SUVs.

        Remember our SUVs also are 4×4. Why would you buy a 2wd SUV, perception of bigger is better? It is more understandable to buy a 2wd pickup.

        It is up against vehicles like the Kia Sorento (Korean made and diesel), Hyundai Santa Fe (same as the Kia). This is what it’s attempting to take sales away from, not the Prado’s, Pajero’s, Landcruisers, Patrols, etc.

        Jeep is a highly blinged vehicle (Koreanesque or even Chinese) competing at the bottom end. The Jeep wouldn’t make no where near the sales it does without the bling. How can this be prestige. It does ride on a very capable 90’s prestige platform, I’ll give it that much credit.

        As for the quantity of SUVs available in the US, what do you think we have on offer here? We have what you have, plus much more.

        I can buy a US import SUV or I have available a huge range of SUVs that you would only dream about.

        It’s called freedom of choice. I like it.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          Big Al,
          Interesting perspective from down under.

          In the US, the JGC has a wide range of competitors. True, it can compete in the $30K range with Hyundai/Kia (and also the Explorer and Pilot), but Jeep does well in the $45-50K range as well with highly optioned variants.

          At that level of equipment, Jeep compares well against the BMW X5, Lexus GX and Benz ML in terms of both equipment and capability.

          What it lacks is the prestige brand, but a lot of Americans like the Jeep brand for being unique and independent and anti-snobby.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @VoGo
            You posed an interesting question and I can answer it. As I was IN the market for a vehicle similar to this Disco and the current Disco.

            I did even consider the Grand Cherokee. I ended up buying a vehicle slightly more expensive, but within a poofteenth cost wise. That is my BT50GT pickup.

            The Disco I couldn’t justify the cost for the work I was expecting the vehicle to do and the length of time of ownership.

            The Grand Cherokee, is nice, but again the vehicle wasn’t as capable as the Disco.

            The Grand is superior off road to my pickup, but by how much? Not much.

            In Australia we off road slightly differently than you do in the US. As thelaine stated, safari style off road touring, fishing and hunting is what we do.

            I needed a vehicle that could carry up to four people comfortably, carry kit and equipment for up to a couple of weeks at a time off roading, that would also include fuel for the vehicle and sometimes a boat, which would also be in tow.

            This is where I laugh at your full size trucks. They don’t have the capability for this, unless you buy a HD. Then you’ve killed your endurance because of the stupidly large vehicle/engine configuration. I want to move equipment, not a lot of wasted vehicle when I’m off road.

            The Disco, wouldn’t have given me this capability. The Jeep certainly wouldn’t have given me this capability.

            The pickup can, as well as be a good off roader. Our midsize pickups are very well designed for off roading. A base model diesel midsizer, Ford, Mazda, Toyota, Izuzu, Holden, etc are very good off road and have exceptional endurance.

            Jeep products are good off road. But they are very limited in what they can carry and their endurance out in the field.

            They are good for a short trip, with an overnight or two of camping. Very suited to the US and even Euro market.

            The Japanese and Euro vehicle fair better at off road touring and 4x4ing.

            The US doesn’t have any competitive vehicle for this segment.

            Here is a taste of the country around where I live in the Outback. This is a days drive away.

            Guys at work will take time off to do this drive. Even last week I spent a couple of days off roading in conditions similar to this. It’s a normal part of life up here. And it’s great.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            I hope the link works this time.

    • 0 avatar
      Compaq Deskpro

      What’s a Wrangler, or a Raptor?

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        Exactly.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        The Wrangler is exceptionally good off road, but doesn’t have payload or endurance. So, it’s a big quad, ie, toy.

        The Raptor, very good in certain off road conditions, but largely useless due to it’s size, capability and large gasoline engine. Again no endurance or payload capacity. Another toy.

        These would be fun in the sand dunes at Stockton Beach near Newcastle. You only need a picnic and a passenger for a day’s outing.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Toyota uber alles.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      That would be my sentiment too.

      The 2012 Grand Cherokee we own is a very capable vehicle with its fancy variable-height suspension, both on-road and off-road, and for the past two winters my wife and I got the most-difficult-to-reach shut-ins to deliver food to, for meals-on-wheels, because the Jeep also does well in axle-deep snow.

      But my next SUV-type vehicle will still be the 2015 Sequoia 4X4.

      • 0 avatar
        mike978

        I am curious, if the JGC has been so good why are you switching next year?

        • 0 avatar

          Sorry to answer before High desert but if I recall he likes the Jeep but was burned by Detroit many times in the past and does not feel comfortable with long term ownership.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            mopar4wd, exactly! And thank you for answering mike978’s question more eloquently than I would have.

            My wife’s Grand Cherokee has been a great vehicle, easily as good as our 2008 Japan-built Highlander continues to be to this day.

            The Highlander is back at home with us now since my 17-yo grand daughter has moved in with her mom in El Paso, TX and will go to school there and use her mom’s minivan to get around since her mom gets a car from the university.

            But once the Grand Cherokee factory warranty expires in Nov 2014, the specter of traditionally costly out-of-warranty repairs looms very large and menacing on the horizon.

            I did buy a supplemental warranty for the GC and will use that as an incentive to the next owner, whether we sell outright or if we trade the GC in on the 2015 Sequoia.

            Now…., we could trade for a new Grand Cherokee every three years, but the experiences of my wife’s sisters with each of their 2014 Grand Cherokees is more than just irksome and irritating. Not much fun when you lose your ride for three days at a time if it has to go in for warranty work.

            So….. my wife and I together resolved to become an all-Toyota family by trading her GC for a Toyota SUV larger than the 2008 Highlander, which we will keep until it dies.

            All we can afford is the Sequoia, preferably with the 5.7, because that is what I have in my 2011 Tundra. Not the most fuel efficient but great power-to-weight ratio and balance.

            If I were a younger man I would not shy away from doing my own repairs on my vehicles. But I simply cannot do that any more, and the real estate business of my wife and her family takes up just about all of my time awake.

            Hence the decision in favor of Toyota’s proven durability, reliability and dependability. At this time in our lives, that’s what we need.

            And, I admit, I feel a lot more secure driving a Toyota product than a 2015 Suburban that conjures up recalls, faulty ignition locksets, and possible death and destruction because I keep a couple of keys on the ignition-key ring.

          • 0 avatar
            tuffjuff

            I don’t even.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            tuffjuff, why? You must have your own druthers.

            Especially now. Since 1 Sept all cars in the US must have the dreaded “blackbox” aboard that can and will testify against you in a court of law with all the data it collects on you every 20 seconds.

            You can keep old cars without all the spy gear running for only as long as parts will be available. But at some point we all will own a newer car that will spy on us.

            Wouldn’t you want a car that you believe in? Since I converted from GM to Toyota in 2008, I have become a believer in Toyota products.

            Yeah, surprised me too! I heard other people tell of their “Oh, whatta feelin\'” stories, among them my best buddy (since 1965) and his 1989 Camry V6.

            Now I know why they are so fired up about Toyota!

            If I had a bad Toyota experience like the bad ownership experiences I had with GM and Ford, no doubt that will change.

            But until then, I’ll put my money where my mouth is and buy Toyota.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          > I am curious, if the JGC has been so good why are you switching next year?

          C’mon man, haven’t you heard about the famous Japan-built Highlander?

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            danio3834, Thank you.

            While the wife’s three sisters have dumped their American-built Highlanders for shop-queen 2014 Grand Cherokees, our oldie soldiers on with >105K trouble-free miles on the clock.

            Man, that’s gotta be worth something!

          • 0 avatar
            tuffjuff

            My understanding of the JGC redesign is the infotainment system has had some bugs which are easily repaired with a firmware update which takes an hour. This hardly justifies calling these vehicles “shop queens,” but clearly you knowing a few people who have happened to have needed their vehicles looked at due to what could just as easily have been user error as opposed to technical fault, and as a result all American vehicles and all Jeeps are just plain garbage. Also, the fact they’re not built in Japan and have a Toyota badge makes them garbage, as well.

            Which is fine because let’s all buy $40,000+ vehicles and 2-3 years later sell them for Toyotas. All hail Toyota.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Buy American! The vehicle will break, and it may even kill you, but the people who told you to buy it will tell anyone who listens that the problem is that stupid and incompetent people buy American cars. User error.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            CJinSD
            What are you talking about?

            The Highlander is built by a foreign company in Indiana, the JGC is built by a foreign company in Michigan.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Touché. The real distinction is whether or not the car is assembled by a company afflicted with organized crime in its US plants. UAW shills aren’t happy when they’ve killed you with their practical joke products. Then they have to tell the world what a clown you were; the sort of rube that has keys on their keyring, can’t steer a car with a locked steering column, and is mortal.

  • avatar

    Completely disagree on this one, Derek.

    The Disco has been the one LR that is the most attainable to purchase (the only one that’s any good at least) and the only one whose owners really do make an attempt to go offroad. At least make a stylistic attempt with their snorkels, Safari racks, etc.

    And in all seriousness, I’ve sold a bunch of older Discos and even LRXs to folks that genuinely take them off-road on more than on occasion.

    The Discovery is all about that ‘look’ and this one doesn’t have it at all. Fail-time.

    It’ll sell, though, sure. Just not to Disco/LR buyers, and there are loyalists out there. And they DO buy.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Derek LOVES the Evoque despite it scoring dead last in just about every objective test, from cargo room, to rear seat head/leg room, to (un)reliability, (lack of) ride quality, etc.

      Evoques will absolutely litter the bleak landscape of BHPH used car lots, beckoning subprime buyers, with checkered Carfax reports, severely wanting service histories & clapped out festoonery, in 2 years time.

      The Evoque is the literal manifestation of the faux-douchery mindset occupying the minds of “la la la la la la I can’t here anything other than WHAT IS MY MONTHLY PAYMENT GOING TO BE!” Stanley Johnson types up to their eyeballs in debt.

      • 0 avatar
        heavy handle

        What are the specific reliability issues with the Evoque/LR2? People keep mentioning how unreliable they are, but never any specific info. Just curious.

        On a related note, the LR2 (known as the Freelander overseas) gets great off-road reviews. One South African site that I enjoy reading considers it to be as good as the Wrangler/JGC Overland/Prado, but much more comfortable, economical, and fun to drive than any of these.

        I’m asking because I do like the looks, and I’m hoping that they’ll be cheap on the used market. Again, people keep promising that they will, but they retain more value than than the bigger Rovers.

        • 0 avatar
          danio3834

          The earlier LR2s are horrible vehicles in my experience. The KV6 engine is garbage. What DW envisions for the Evoque in a few years is the LR2 today:

          “Evoques will absolutely litter the bleak landscape of BHPH used car lots, beckoning subprime buyers, with checkered Carfax reports, severely wanting service histories & clapped out festoonery, in 2 years time.”

          It’s more frequent than not that I run into one that doesn’t need a new engine or that hasn’t already had a replacement one installed. Head gasket problems are common.

          • 0 avatar
            heavy handle

            danio,

            Blown head gaskets were endemic to the Rover V6 on the Freelander. Those were so bad that Rover changed the name of the product in North America. The rest of the world didn’t purchase V6 Freelanders, so they never experienced these issues.

            I am asking about the Ford Ecoboost-powered Evoque and LR2.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Rarely did you see a Freelander/LR2 make it past 60K miles on the original engine.

      • 0 avatar
        tuffjuff

        @DW

        I hate to read it to you, but Ford hasn’t owned LR/RR in years. It’s okay to drop the hate.

        The Evoque sells for the same reason the BMW X1 manages to sell for 40k+ without simple, common features like navigation or a comfortable seat – it’s seen as stylish and a premium product. That isn’t a foreign concept to many, and I’m sorry to hear that it is for you. And the Evoque would need to be both available and inexpensive when pre owned in order to populate BHPH lots. Unfortunately there are only a few hundred used Evoques in the country and most are still 40k+, with few if any being available below 35k.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    Just one man’s opinion, but I think it looks hot.

  • avatar
    peeryog

    But I thought the LR3 and LR4 were already unibodies, not BOF. Same for the Range Rover.

  • avatar
    Richard Chen

    On the day the diaspora of Arthur Andersen reclaim their tarnished name, Land Rover reintroduces a Discovery to the US market.

    But this is a LR2 replacement, right?

  • avatar
    turboprius

    Looks too much like the Evoque and the Range Rover Sport. Seriously, kill both the LR2 and the Evoque, and keep this as the small crossover.

    It looks pretty small, yes, but it could tackle the trips to “Prissy Charter School of Johns Creek”, “Prissy Nail Salon of Johns Creek”, “Prissy Whole Foods Market of Johns Creek”, and those nightly dinner trips to “Prissy Restaurant in Buckhead”. Only problem: they aren’t available at CarMax yet.

  • avatar
    petezeiss

    Needs full moons instead of spokes. And lose half the horizontal lines in the face.

  • avatar
    rdeiriar

    There is something wrong here

    According to LR, this is not meant to be the replacement of the LR4/Discovery, that model is going to be based on the Range Rover/RR Sport aluminium intensive architecture (Longitudinal engine, low range), and it’s not ready yet.

    This is the replacement of the Freelander, based on the same platform as the RR Evoque (Transverse engine) with a new space saving rear suspension

  • avatar
    azmtbkr81

    “No such outrage has been present for the new Land Rover Discovery’s err, crossing over.”

    That’s because off-road enthusiasts haven’t considered Land Rover to be an off-road brand for many years, especially in the US.

    I would have been bowled over in disbelief if the Discovery turned out to be anything other than another gadget-packed, blingy CUV. This release is a non-event for anyone other than well-heeled yoga moms.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      +1

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      azmtbkr81
      I have to disagree with you.

      The Disco in Australia and in other regions around the world is used for off roading, similar to Landcruisers, Patrols and even Range Rovers. We do have ‘Torak Tractors’, 4x4s used to take kids to school and shopping. But even many of them are used for cross country jaunts off road.

      Maybe in the US (which isn’t the world) this occurs and maybe that’s why some who blog on this site think the Caddy Silverado Escalade is a great SUV.

      I do feel this will even outperform the Grand Cherokee off road. They both will be similar in construction. The biggest difference might be the Disco will be aluminium and a prestige vehicle.

      Rover (Tata) will ensure this vehicle will maintain it’s great credibility and heritage as an off road wagon, especially with the 3 litre V6 diesel, the best variant of the current Disco.

      As I’ve stated the Grand is a great off roader, especially for what you pay. But, it still isn’t as good as a Prado for long distance off road touring, it’s to small.

      • 0 avatar
        mike978

        If you watched Top Gear you would know that every LR/RR they have reviewed can still do the off road stuff. Most don`t but if you do then LR/RR competes with Jeep for off-roading and is certainly more able than CRV/CX5 etc.

        • 0 avatar
          Maymar

          Not sure I trust Top Gear to be unbiased about anything British. Decent entertainment, but they definitely have a Britania Uber Alles agenda.

          • 0 avatar
            bosozoku

            Agreed. Top Gear is not, nor ever was, a factual program. It’s top-quality car-related entertainment and a marketing platform for automakers.

          • 0 avatar

            “Right, news from India. They have a large company there, called `Tata’, which has a big car division. And here’s their new car…”

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Land Rovers aren’t up to the task of on-road travel. The idea of taking one further off-road than one can walk back from in a couple hours is absurd.

        • 0 avatar
          hgrunt

          You’d be surprised at how well any car, with the proper tires, can perform in most off-road situations. I’d love to see some kind of segment where they slap the same off-road tires on a bunch of vehicles and run them through some test courses.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            “You’d be surprised at how well any car, with the proper tires, can perform in most off-road situations.”

            Yes and no. The Jeeper holy grail of solid axles with three lockers isn’t worth much of anything outside of crawling over technical obstacles with a spotter. 2WD will take you a long way into the woods with decent tires and attention to momentum.

            But with huge plastic airdams giving a 16-18 degree approach angle and no underbody protection whatsoever, rarely even a real spare tire anymore, the problem is less one of traction and more one of the ease of catastrophic damage.

            I don’t know how good a job LR does with underbody layout on their cute utes but I do know I wouldn’t take a CRV into the woods no matter how good its tires were.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            “You’d be surprised at how well any car, with the proper tires, can perform in most off-road situations.”

            That was basically my teenage and college years. FWD econoboxes tend to sever their axle shafts at the CV joints. Full size RWD sedans are great with deep treaded tires and welded differential spider gears.

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          They have a hard time hiding the trim falling off in those segments.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    Yuck. Unreliable as they were, the old Discos looked good and had BEAUTIFUL interiors.

    To me BoF seems more advantageous. These are not sports cars. They don’t have to corner the PooPingRing. Fuel economy? Its still a big SUV. Does 3mpg really matter?

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      It’s because it is a big SUV that 3 mpg really would matter. Let’s say you go from an old 454-equipped 3/4 ton Suburban that gets 12 MPG to a newer 6.0 that gets 15 (just pulling numbers out of thin air here). That’s a 25% increase in fuel economy, 25% more money you can spend elsewhere.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        My wife’s dad did just that, went from a 1973 Suburban 454 4X4 to a 2013 Suburban RWD.

        Aside from the 2013 being a dog, the gas mileage is still nothing to brag about. Then again, if it is used for business, the business picks up the expense for the gas.

        I have to utter my preference for the 2015 Sequoia 5.7L 4X4 here because IMO it is a better vehicle all-around than the Suburban.

        • 0 avatar
          mike978

          You keep uttering that preference, I think we all know by now.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            mike978, you’d be surprised.

            I, too, would have thought that once I stated something once, everyone who chooses to read my comments would know and understand my intents.

            Just like the comment mopar4wd so ably and accurately answered for me, earlier in this thread, about trading our JGC for a 2015 Sequoia.

          • 0 avatar
            tuffjuff

            I mean any vehicle made by a company that isn’t either Toyota or a Toyota subsidiary is clearly not worth owning.

            As a side note, when I’m older and on a fixed income I’ll be sure to pick up a BOF 7 seater when a minivan makes just as much sense. Why not blow 60k+ on a 15 MPG dinosaur, while you’ve got the scratch, right?

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “Does 3mpg really matter?”

      If it does, the buyers can’t afford them, and shouldn’t buy them.

    • 0 avatar
      Signal11

      I don’t know if beautiful is what comes to mind when I think of the interiors of old Discos. Small and cramped is the first thing I think.

    • 0 avatar
      bosozoku

      > PooPingRing

      You should be ashamed of that one.

  • avatar
    Spartan

    It’s about time Land Rover ditched that heavy BOF fuel hog for a much more efficient unibody design. This has been looooong overdue.

    Love the comment about “A crop of non-buying know-it-alls finds it unsatisfactory due to its lack of off-road chops.” That couldn’t be more true. Land Rover will sell these things by the shipload.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Meh, range rovers haven’t had any offroad worthy chops in a long time. They don’t market to the offroad crowd, but rather see a bigger market charging twice its worth and calling an economy vehicle premium for the women.

    It works.. To a small extent, not exactly a healthy business plan for when the minivan phase falls out.

  • avatar
    slance66

    What a brutal audience. This replaces the LR2. They just created a very attractive, reasonably efficient SUV, which may be the smallest 7 seat capable SUV on the market. It may look a little like a smaller Explorer (not that Dead Weight or anyone else here has seen one), but the Explorer sells like hotcakes for a reason. I have little doubt that while it won’t be truly off road capable, it will be better in snow and mud than its competition in this space. Nobody goes off-roading in a car this expensive. My wife loved it immediately. I’ll wait to see them live and see the specs, including actual prices. But this will sell 10X over the LR2.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      This is a misnomer, I took my H2 offroad the day after I bought it new in 03. An while I didn’t buy either of my H1s new, both were offroaded by the original owners I bought from.
      Yuppies don’t take vehicles offroad, people that have the money and need/want an offroad capable vehicle are stuck buying used.

    • 0 avatar
      hachee

      Exactly. I can’t believe this discussion is still going on, and that Derek hasn’t corrected his posting after numerous people here made it clear, not to mention a lot of other websites have also, that this isn’t a replacement for the Discovery/LR4. This is like the old SNL Rosanne Rosanada skit (“Never mind.”).

      This will sell much better than the LR2, which never really sold well because all it really had was the badge. Where the Evoque seems to be a more niche vehicle, this will compete directly with the GLK, Q5, X3 market, which is big and getting bigger.

    • 0 avatar
      heavy handle

      ” Nobody goes off-roading in a car this expensive.”

      Depends where you live I guess. The people I know with Rovers also own properties way off the beaten track.

      Their Mercs and Jags and Bimmers don’t get off-roaded, but the Rovers do. Off course, that’s going by the Canadian definition of off-road (“the road ends here, but I’ve got a ways to go”). I know that others define off-roading as rock crawling, mudding, etc, in which case you would want to get something cheap and cheerful, and then lift it.

  • avatar
    Tstag

    TTAC should have been clearer. This model replaces the Freelander and is a massive leap forward from that model (at a price). The current Discovery will evolve and therefore should not dispoint loyal fans.

    Those people who want a Cherokee rival just need to wait for the new range of Defenders to launch. JLR are launching lots more SUV, there will be a mid size Range Rover, between the Evoque and Sport. And probably a smaller Disco. Lots and lots of new metal is on the way.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Hummer: Jeez, I can’t imagine paying that much for 1 vehicle, $1,900 is what one could expect to pay for about 3-4...
  • geozinger: Fnck. I’ve lost lots of cars to the tinworm. I had a 97 Cavalier that I ran up to 265000 miles. The...
  • jh26036: Who is paying $55k for a CTR? Plenty are going before the $35k sticker.
  • JimZ: Since that’s not going to happen, why should I waste any time on your nonsensical what-if?
  • JimZ: Funny, Jim Hackett said basically the same thing yesterday and people were flinging crap left and right.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States