By on May 2, 2019

After becoming the preferred choice for manufacturers delivering both mainstream autos and high-end performance vehicles, the V6 is starting to lose ground to its inline counterpart. Numerous automakers are replacing twin banks with one long one.

Despite the V6’s packaging advantages, mild hybridization and the standardization of modular engines has made the more-affordable straight six increasingly viable. Environmental regulations have also convinced many automakers to downsize, leaving large automobiles with V8-sized engine bays that can more easily accommodate a longer unit with fewer cylinders.

While Mercedes-Benz is probably the automaker best known for helping the I6’s resurgence, it’s not alone. Jaguar Land Rover is also abandoning the V6 for something straighter. Having already shown off its next-gen mill inside the Range Rover Sport HST, the brand now plans to install it in its flagship SUV for the 2020 model year. 

The Jaguar-sourced V6 is gone; in its place is a 3.0-liter inline-six from JLR’s Ingenium engine family, using the predictable mild hybrid setup. According to the manufacturer, the change aims to promote “straight-six balance, refinement and efficiency” to further enhance the most-expensive Range Rover’s “peerless luxury and enduring appeal.”

Twin-charged, with the 48-volt hybrid recouping energy during coasting, JLR claims the 3.0-liter Ingenium is good for about 355 hp and 406 ft-lb of torque. That’s supposed to translate to a 0-60 time of 5.9 seconds and a top speed of 140 mph, which isn’t terrible for an automobile weighing in at two tons in its lightest configuration.

“Traditional Range Rover strengths have been heightened with the introduction of the latest 3.0-liter six-cylinder engine. Advanced technologies, such as Continuous Variable Valve Lift, work alongside a mild-hybrid system that harvests energy as you drive, to improve fuel efficiency and lower emissions,” said Nick Rogers, JLR’s executive director of product engineering. “The otherwise wasted energy is used to power the electric supercharger, which enhances vehicle capability by enhancing the torque curve at low engine speeds for greater responses. Superior comfort is achieved thanks to the natural mass balance of the engine, which allows it to run more smoothly.”

Land Rover says U.S. pricing, after destination, will start at $92,195. Of course, the brand is also happy to accommodate individuals looking to spend six figures to acquire more than six cylinders. While we cannot say for how long, the flagship Range Rover will remain available with the 518 hp, 5.0-liter V8 for $107,245. There’s also plenty of financial wiggle room between the two, with the company offering a 245 horsepower diesel and the P400e plug-in hybrid.

Athletic changes include optional 22-inch black wheels and a couple of swapped paint colors. Otherwise, the 2020 Land Rover Range Rover persists largely unchanged — as does the brand’s clumsy naming strategy for the model.

[Images: Jaguar Land Rover]

 

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

36 Comments on “Going Straight: 2020 Range Rover Swaps V6 for Inline Engine...”


  • avatar
    Lie2me

    $15K upcharge just to get the V8? I’ll pass ;-)

  • avatar

    I’m in for I6 time once more. The GS needs one (not a BMW one).

  • avatar
    Stumpaster

    “going straight”, replace “for something straighter”

    Homophobic references much?

  • avatar
    Hummer

    This is long overdue, V6 have the stank of owners not ponying up for the 8 still. I6s have at least developed the appearance of being a higher end configuration.

    Not that I have a need for an in-line 6 minivan.

  • avatar
    1500cc

    I don’t follow JLR much … was the old V6 the one where it’s a V8 with two cylinders capped off?

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      Essentially, yes. I imagine they didn’t have the budget to develop a unique 6-cylinder engine, so the V6 is based on the V8. That mens it’s at a 90-degree angle, which is not ideal for a V6.

      • 0 avatar
        1500cc

        But I mean that literally. I know tonnes of V6s are made from sawed off V8s, but didn’t JLR produce a a V6 using an actual V8 block, and leaving the other two cylinders empty?

  • avatar
    EquipmentJunkie

    I’m a big fan of the I-6 whether it uses gasoline or diesel as the fuel.

    Try to name a truly horrible I-6 engine. Some I-6 engines are OK, but many are truly great. Smooth, torquey down low, service-friendly, and long-lasting. The I-6 exhaust notes are not generally as pleasing as a V-8’s, but that’s a small price to pay for greatness in my mind.

    • 0 avatar
      Raevoxx

      The M52 was by far my favorite exhaust note. I miss my E36 328.

      Second to that, actually, was the exhaust note of my Probe GT with the KL-DE V6.

    • 0 avatar
      FormerFF

      Six cylinder exhaust notes are my favorite, Inline, flat, Vee, they all sound good to me. My current favorite is the Porsche 911 RSR that runs in the Weathertech series. It’s otherworldly.

    • 0 avatar
      Maymar

      Ooh! I sadly know the answer to this one – the Suzuki Verona/Chevrolet Epica ran a small Porsche-developed straight six that was underpowered, thirsty, and unreliable (although it was apparently smooth at least).

  • avatar
    thelaine

    This is a really nice looking vehicle, inside and out.

  • avatar
    Steve203

    No-one mentions that inline 6s are cheaper to make. Only 1 head, instead of 2. Only 1 exhaust manifold, instead of 2. All the exhaust on one side, so can get by with only 1 close coupled turbocharger, instead of 2 (although 2 smaller, lighter, one would probably be more responsive than 1 big, heavy, one)

    Then there is the push for AWD among SUV crazed buyers, which is easier to work out with a longitudinal engine, and the decline of the larger front drive only passenger car, where the V6 offered a packaging advantage.

    Rumor mill has been persistent that FCA is working on an I6 version of the GME I4, that could be machined on the same line, which would probably be the end of the Pentastar.

    • 0 avatar
      Lorenzo

      The pentastar is a nice engine, but even after reducing the displacement, they can’t get the fuel economy they need. A long stroke inline six with low end torque can be made thriftier for cars and still be useful in trucks.

      It seems the Iacocca era Chrysler had the right idea with longitudinal engines in the FWD LH models to make AWD easier to add later. Putting an I6 in the 500L-based Jeeps might be a challenge.

      • 0 avatar
        Steve203

        ” A long stroke inline six with low end torque can be made thriftier for cars and still be useful in trucks.”

        FCA seems to be going the route of it’s eTorque system, using an electric motor to help get off the line.

        “It seems the Iacocca era Chrysler had the right idea with longitudinal engines in the FWD LH models to make AWD easier to add later.”

        Chrysler was working with the Renault platform under the Premier. The front drive Renaults had had longitudinal engines since the 60s.

        “Putting an I6 in the 500L-based Jeeps might be a challenge.”

        A 3 litre turbocharged, eTorque, six would put a 500L/500X/Renegade/Compass in orbit. The new engine for the Renegade this year is a 1.3T that about matches the old 2.4 in output. I saw a road test video from Motorweek of the 2019 Cherokee with the new 2.0T and the thing pulled 60 in 6.7 seconds. A 3 Litre six would provide power in Grand Cherokee/Wagoneer territory.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    Will this make it harder, or easier, to winch it up on a rollback truck?

  • avatar
    ajla

    This would be cool in a Jaguar, but JLR seems to have abandoned 6-cylinder cars for anyone with under $70K to spend.

  • avatar
    stuki

    Saddled with turbos, electric Superchargers, slush boxes, electric motors and enough nannytronics to run the Enterprise; exactly how the poor, buried under it all, cylinders are laid out, is pretty darned irrelevant.

    The NA I6s, coupled with manuals, in the 3 series back when it was a “driving machine,” were certainly a step above anything with a V. But largely because those longish stroke, yet free revving, I6s were so sublime across such a broad spread of both engine speeds, and engine acceleration/deceleration.

    Unless they package easier next to batteries, the only reason for this “resurgence,” which seems to, almost entirely, be happening within the “pay more for something I’m told matters” segment, is just differentiation and marketineering. About as relevant to performance, as how fast someone else supposedly drove a car similar to yours around Burgerking.

    • 0 avatar
      dividebytube

      My bottom-of-the-barrel 2004 BMW 325i had such a sublime I6 engine. It made everything before ‘n’ after feel positively primitive. I do like the 3.7L V6 in my current Mustang but it certainly doesn’t have that silky smoothness of the BMW.

  • avatar
    Boxerman

    V6s are mostly vibratey beasts, devoid of character. The FCA v6 no match for the long departed Chrysler slant 6.

    Will we see an Ftype with this motor, thats the classic Jag layout. Even betetr with a stick. The V8 and autobox always seemed more grand tourer and overpowered. The Ftype with a inline 6 and stick, could be a classic.

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      The Hyper-Pak at Daytona was one of the great moments in automotive history and the Porous-Star is an over-rated mediocrity. That being said, in what way other than durability and immunity to abuse isn’t it better than the slant-six? One of my first cars had a 225, and I remember some things about it fondly. It didn’t deliver a power to weight ratio that would be acceptable in a diesel today, nor was it remotely as smooth as various seven-main-bearing inline sixes I have had since.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        My slant six had a puny 1-barrel carb. Chrysler put a 4-barrel on one and got 220 HP out of it, pushrods and all. They declined to market any but the 1-bbl Carter, catering to the thrifty who were buying Ramblers.

        I imagine a slant six with a 24 valve overhead cam head, with HEI and fuel injection would have been really something (and expensive to modify), but Iacocca let the engine die once the last RWD car was discontinued. I remember Maximum Bob Lutz complaining about the loss of the M body New Yorker.

  • avatar
    volvoguyincanada

    Ah, 90’s design never looked so good.
    Also: Volvo S80 has an i6 and it’s so god damn smooth.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • 1500cc: But I mean that literally. I know tonnes of V6s are made from sawed off V8s, but didn’t JLR produce a a...
  • Lie2me: I agree, I don’t think hybrid is a good solution for the reasons you state, but all electric seems like...
  • Vulpine: A hybrid system is hardly simple; you have both an electric and a mechanical drive system trying to work in...
  • golden2husky: FedEX does have a fleet of electric trucks that entered service sometime around 2011 ish. Don’t...
  • golden2husky: We will look back someday when stuff like this is no longer made. Mopar, make more! If I hit a...

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