Range Rover Sales Are Booming In The U.S. – $80K+ SUV Outsells Evoque, Flex, Yukon XL, GLA, Cayenne
Land Rover USA reported more than 1000 Range Rover sales in each of the last six months and in eight of the last nine months. Year-over-year volume has now increased in four consecutive months as well as in seven of the last eight months.
But it was the month of March in particular that drew special attention to U.S. sales performance of one of the world’s best known high-end SUVs.
Land Rover reported 1996 Range Rover sales in America in March 2015, a 151%, 1202-unit year-over-year increase.
Three out of every ten Land Rovers sold last month in the U.S. were Range Rovers, a luxury SUV with a USD base price above $80,000 (and options which take the MSRP well beyond $140,000). Only Land Rover’s second-most-expensive model, the Range Rover Sport, sold more often, thanks to a 51% jump to 2646 March sales.Land RoverMarch2015March2014% Change3 mos. 20153 mos. 2014% ChangeRange Rover Sport2,6461,74751.5%6,2254,82329.1%Range Rover1,996794151%4,8352,88467.6%Range Rover Evoque1,2841,370-6.3%3,7943,17619.5%LR4841157436%2,0651,14480.5%LR211331-96.7%571,052-94.6%———————Total6,7784,39954.1% 16,97613,07919.8%
The Range Rover, reviewed in long-wheelbase form by Kamil Kaluski on TTAC last fall, outsold the whole Jaguar brand by 336 units and outsold Jaguar’s flagship, the XJ, by nearly five to one. The Infiniti QX80 trailed the Range Rover by 580 March sales. The Range Rover sold 82% more often than the steadily improving Lincoln Navigator.
Combined, the Toyota Land Cruiser, Lexus LX570, and Mercedes-Benz G-Class didn’t sell half as often as the Range Rover in March. High-end SUVs which outsold the Indo-Brit Range Rover all have distinctly lower base prices, from the Cadillac Escalade ($73K, 2758 March sales between standard and long-wheelbase derivatives) to the Mercedes-Benz GL-Class ($64K, 2365 March sales). Porsche Cayenne volume slipped 27% to 1364 units; the BMW X6 was up 58% to 587 March sales.
Yet more than the Range Rover’s ability to outsell a bevy of high-end SUVs (thanks to its first 1800+ month of sales since December 2005), the truly impressive thing about operating at a 2K monthly pace is the number of rather more mainstream (allegedly) vehicles outsold by the most costly Land Rover.
The Buick Regal, Ford Flex, GMC Yukon XL, and Mazda CX-9 are just some of the volume brand vehicles which didn’t sell as often as the Range Rover last month. Add to that list much talked about vehicles like the Mercedes-Benz GLA, Nissan Leaf, Cadillac CTS, Porsche Cayenne, BMW X1, and Land Rover’s own Range Rover Evoque.
No, it’s not a one-time thing. The Regal, Flex, CX-9, Leaf, CTS, Cayenne, X1, and Evoque all trail the suddenly high-volume Range Rover on a year-to-date basis, not just in the month of March. And by high-volume, we mean nobly aristocratic. The Range Rover is the SUV of royals, after all.
As for the overarching brand, Land Rover says the brand “established a new March U.S. sales record with 6,778 units sold.” Five nameplates combined for a 54% YOY improvement. The Range Rover trio of nameplates generated 85% of the brand’s March U.S. volume.
Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures.
Gtem on Apr 27, 2015
I remember when Top Gear did a piece on this latest RR when it came out, having it race against an autonomous (or maybe just remote control?) 6x6 army truck. At one point the camera does a quick shot of the dash to show the tachometer climbing, and it's a full christmas tree: ABS, Traction Control, Check Engine, all burning brightly! I couldn't help but laugh, this is the famous "Three Amigos" as DIY Land Rover guys call them. Later on in the piece the RR's front fascia was looking quite worse for the wear with some plastic bits dragging, and my understanding is that over the course of filming, a number of rims were damaged. Understandable given their huge diameter and rubber band tires. They're certainly handsome vehicles, but as a number of other commenters have brought up, I'd prefer the understated and UN approved 200 series Land Cruiser. If I'm buying something for that much money in that sort of segment of "indomitable luxury 4x4" I want something that is truly high quality and of utmost durability. Not something that will leave me stranded with a deflated air suspension. There's a very good reason the 100 Series landcruisers still cost a mint ($9000 and up) for the most worn out first year 1998 truck with 200k+ miles, and similar vintage RRs mostly litter BHPH lots and sit listing to one side (failed airbag) in the ghetto.
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- Teddyc73 The Bronco just doesn't have enough editions and models.
- ToolGuy @Matt, let me throw this at you:Let's say I drive a typical ICE vehicle 15,000 miles/year at a typical 18 mpg (observed). Let's say fuel is $4.50/gallon and electricity cost for my EV will be one-third of my gasoline cost - so replacing the ICE with an EV would save me $2,500 per year. Let's say I keep my vehicles 8 years. That's $20,000 in fuel savings over the life of the vehicle.If the vehicles have equal capabilities and are otherwise comparable, a rational typical consumer should be willing to pay up to a $20,000 premium for the EV over the ICE. (More if they drive more.)TL;DR: Why do they cost more? Because they are worth it (potentially).
- Inside Looking Out Why EBFlex dominates this EV discussion? Just because he is a Ford expert?
- Marky S. Very nice article and photos. I am a HUGE Edsel fan. I have always been fascinated with the "Charlie Brown of Cars." Allow me to make a minor correction to add here: the Pacer line was the second-from-bottom rung Edsel, not the entry-level trim. That would be the Edsel Ranger for 1958. It had the widest array of body styles. The Ranger 2-door sedan (with a "B-pillar", not a pillarless hardtop), was priced at $2,484. So, the Ranger and Pacer both used the smaller Ford body. The next two upscale Edsel's were based on the Mercury body, are were: Corsair, and, top-line Citation. Although the 1959 style is my fav. I would love a '58 Edsel Pacer 4-door hardtop sedan!
- Lou_BC Stupid to kill the 6ft box in the crewcab. That's the most common Canyon/Colorado trim I see. That kills the utility of a small truck. The extended cab was a poor seller so that makes sense. GM should have kept the diesel. It's a decent engine that mates well with the 6 speed. Fuel economy is impressive.