By on April 10, 2015

2016-Land-Rover-Range-Rover-SVAutobiography-106-876x535

Though Bentley and Rolls-Royce are adding ultra-luxury SUVs to their collections, Jaguar Land Rover has no plans to put one above Range Rover.

Car & Driver reports JLR North America CEO and president Joe Eberhardt stated during the 2015 New York Auto Show that such a thing won’t likely occur, adding that JLR hasn’t yet seen “where Range Rover can go.” Eberhardt also said that he wasn’t too worried about the ultra-luxury SUV competition stealing sales from the high-end brand.

Presently, the most expensive Range Rover in JLR’s lineup is the recently introduced Range Rover SVAutobiography, which tops out the range with a base price of $200,490; the Bentley and Roller SUVs are expected to begin between $300,000 and $400,000 for comparison.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

22 Comments on “Eberhardt: No Separate Brand Above Range Rover For Ultra-Luxury SUVs...”


  • avatar
    Spartan

    Mercedes has no issues moving G-Wagens with V6 turbo diesels to the insane top trim TTV12 with enough power to spin the Earth backwards. So why would Land Rover need another SUV above the Range Rover?

    Bentley and Rolls Royce are late the the party. The Range Rover is the standard of high end luxury SUVs and it’s going to take a lot more than a high price tag and name recognition to unseat the Range Rover.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      @Spartan,
      I agree with you regarding Range Rovers position as quite a premium SUV.

      It not only is a prestigious vehicle it is an exceptionally capable off roader.

      Rolls and Bentley don’t have a big name off roading either. Porsche has a more “rugged” name due to it’s performance orientated vehicles, I do think that helped them with their SUVs.

  • avatar
    Paddan

    I think Land Rover has diluted the Range Rover name with the Sport and Evoque. But I agree that Range Rover is the top rung and there’s no need for another name.

  • avatar

    I do understand the appeal of the ultra-luxury sedans and coupés that Bentley and Rolls-Royce have on offer (indeed the Bentley Mulsanne is one of my all-time favorite cars), but I think that the Range Rover is pretty much the pinnacle of luxury SUVs, and that even the normal Supercharged version is pretty much as nice and as luxurious as I’d need an SUV to be, let alone the range-topping SVAutobiography. I’m not convinced that the Bentley Bentayga or its Rolls-Royce rival will be worth their premiums, and I’m not impressed with what I’ve seen of the Bentayga’s styling, which looks frumpier than all of VW Group’s other rugged SUVs (Cayenne, Touareg, Q7).

  • avatar
    sportyaccordy

    Smart business. Range Rover has an established brand, market, sales volume and by extension profit for not much investment. Bentley and RR are going to pour money into these things only to get back a Maybach level flop. RR’s desire for an SUV is strange to me as the Ghost is pretty much an SUV with a liftgate. Maybe they will play it smart and just make a Ghost Outback. Bentley’s effort is doomed though; the brand design language just doesn’t translate well to an SUV.

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      In the fastest growing car-, and particularly luxury car, markets in the world, brands are a lot less “established” than the view from the West may lead one to believe. Bent & RR could very well succeed in establishing a reputation for being “above” the Range Rover, products RR drivers ought to aspire to, in those markets, unless JLR moves the Range upwards as well to counter.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Good. It’s good to see a company exercise _restraint_ for a change.

    There’s no need for every marque to be a full-line one. Reference: the clusterf*ck that is Volkswagen (Porsche and Lamborghini SUVs! Audi supercars! Volkswagen supersedans!)

    Tata doesn’t need Tata-branded luxury cars, Jaguar doesn’t need SUVs and Land Rover doesn’t need a sports car. Perfect.

  • avatar
    S2k Chris

    How many SUVs can Bentley and Rolls sell, combined? MAYBE 5k a year? MAYBE? And probably to people who already own a Range Rover? Certainly not enough profit in that segment to justify a new nameplate, maybe not even a new model.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    He’s of course right. They can do as many RR editions as they want, and they don’t need a new name for them. That name is well known all over the world, and is prestigious in countries where people have the money to buy them.

    If they want more money, just make an LWB here and there, and a special edition or higher trim.

    And IMO either the early 90s one in LWB County format, or the one from 04-09ish are the best looking. After that they got chintzy, and the new one is too swoopy.

    • 0 avatar

      I think you’re thinking of the 2006-2009 “L322” Range Rover. I don’t know that any changes took place between 2002/2003 and 2004. The L322 debuted for MY2003 here in the States, but 2006 is when they had the first refresh, which is immediately identifiable by the circular lights that cut into the front grille and the substitution of the amber rear indicator lenses for clear ones. That’s also when Ford said, “We already own another British company; why keep using this German BMW running gear?” and so started using Jaguar engines in the Range Rover, and included the Supercharged variant for the first time. I believe the BMW satnav unit was also replaced at that time. For 2007, the Terrain Response system was added, necessitating a redesign of the center console, and the key slot was moved from said center console to the dashboard, just to the left of the central air vents…and some other electronic upgrades were made. Some BMW parts did remain through the entirety of the L322’s run, like the seat switches. As proven by “Wheeler Dealers”, it is possible to graft the updated front fascia of the 2006-2009 onto a 2003-2005…and some people have even—at considerable expense—managed to put the 2010-2012 face onto an earlier version.

      But what didn’t you like about the 2010-2012 version? I thought it was well-executed, aside from the giant LCD panel that became the instrument panel.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        I think you incorrectly typed 02 up there when you meant 06. (Nvm you fixed.)

        So I like the 03-09, either version of that is fine. And I like the 86-95 version, because it’s just so classic.

        The 10-12:
        http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/LandRoverRangeRoverAutobiographyUltimateEditionexterior.jpg

        Is too fiddly in detail. I don’t like the LED lights (overall the lighting details -anything inside those lenses- are overworked), I don’t like the busy grille, I don’t like the details on the side vents. On this Autobiography example I hate the tornado wheels as well.

        It’s a beautiful color, and I should see a beautiful color on a delightfully boxy thing. But I see overworked detail instead. Lipstick on an aged pig.

  • avatar

    At the introduction at the NYAS of the Range Rover SV Autobiography, which is $120,000 worth of trim and stuff added to a $80,000 vehicle, I turned to someone and said, “Why don’t they just call it the Range Rover Expensive?”

    A few minutes later Jaguar’s Andy Palmer concluded his remarks with, “And it’s very expensive!”

  • avatar
    fincar1

    I will say that I saw a convoy truck headed north on I-5 with a load of Range Rovers. Two of the six were totally wrapped in white cloth.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    Good move. You don’t need to go further upmarket beyond the brand preferred by the Queen of England.

    But the Evoque should die in a fire. Or at least be badged a Land Rover. That is the single vehicle I irrationally hate the most (yes, way more than K2XX SUVs). It’s the yappy Shih Tzu of cars. Useless, annoying, no redeeming qualities whatsoever, basically a Ford Escape with less room, more ugly, and a much higher price.

    • 0 avatar

      The new Land Rover Discovery Sport (replacing the LR2) pretty much *is* the Land-Rover-branded version of the Range Rover Evoque. They’re on the same platform and everything.

      Hopefully, though, using the “Discovery Sport” name for the smallest Land Rover means that the LR4 will be renamed the “Discovery/Discovery 4” as it is called everywhere else.

  • avatar

    I am very frustrated – I would buy Land Rover for that price, but Bentley and Rolls Royce – never – I do not want to show off.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • el scotto: @Dartdude Our Federal Government, thankfully, is not like Apple computer corporation. I have an iPhone 3...
  • el scotto: @SCE to Aux; I can think of three stand-alone Cadillac dealers. Lockhart Cadillac in Greenwood and Fishers...
  • Ol Shel: You should choose a car from a company that’s never had a recall, like: Nash, Duesenberg, Datsun,...
  • RHD: That’s a lot of money to put on the line for such a silly bet. Truth be told, ICE vehicles will be slowly...
  • DenverMike: The old fogeys say that. It assumes the grade coming up the mountain is the same one going down. Or...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber