Range Rover Sport - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Ford Forum Ford Forum

» Auto Insurance
» Featured Product
ยป Wheel & Tire Center

Go Back   Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Ford Cars and PAG Vehicles > PAG Vehicle Discussion > Land Rover
Register Home Forum Active Topics Photo Gallery Auto Loans Garage Mark Forums Read Auto Escrow

FordForums.com is the premier Ford Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-05-2005, 18:01   #1 (permalink)
Bob Hobden
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Range Rover Sport

Just read the road test back to back of the RR Sport the equivalent X5 4.8
and the Porsche Cayenne Turbo in Autocar this week. Looks good even if it
was beaten by the X5 overall.
But, LR really do have to address the excess weight of their vehicles, first
the new Disco 3 and now the RR Sport spinoff is much heavier than it's
competitors with all the problems that causes for it.

--
Regards
Bob
In Runnymede, 17 miles West of London




  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-06-2005, 02:01   #2 (permalink)
beamendsltd
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport

In message <3bgj5aF6isgpqU1@individual.net>
"Bob Hobden" <me@privacy.net> wrote:

> Just read the road test back to back of the RR Sport the equivalent X5 4.8
> and the Porsche Cayenne Turbo in Autocar this week. Looks good even if it
> was beaten by the X5 overall.
> But, LR really do have to address the excess weight of their vehicles, first
> the new Disco 3 and now the RR Sport spinoff is much heavier than it's
> competitors with all the problems that causes for it.
>

Unless one is looking for an off-road vehicle (as opposed
to a 4 wheel drive), in which case none of the vehicles above
need apply. If LR want to compete on even terms with X5's etc
then they need a whole new vehicle, which would no longer be
a Land Rover and may as well have a Ford badge to avoid diluting
even further the marques image.
X5's etc simply reinforce the anti-4x4 peoples case and are
gong to do untold harm to those of us who actually go off-road
(i.e. not just National Trust car parks and insisting on
parking with two wheels on the kerb) and/or use our vehicles
off-road for work.

Sorry if I've upset anyone, but BMW, VW, Porsch (actually VW
with a spot of badge engineering) and even the current Shoguns
(have a look at the ground clearance) are all utterly pointless
vehicles - their owners would be much better off with a
4 wheel drive MPV, though slightly less inflated ego's.

Rant over!

Richard
--
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 02:01   #3 (permalink)
Austin Shackles
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport

On or around Tue, 5 Apr 2005 23:52:29 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <me@privacy.net>
enlightened us thusly:

>Just read the road test back to back of the RR Sport the equivalent X5 4.8
>and the Porsche Cayenne Turbo in Autocar this week. Looks good even if it
>was beaten by the X5 overall.
>But, LR really do have to address the excess weight of their vehicles, first
>the new Disco 3 and now the RR Sport spinoff is much heavier than it's
>competitors with all the problems that causes for it.


I gather the Cayenne is no lightweight, though - 's just got a monster
sod-off engine...

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
Travel The Galaxy! Meet Fascinating Life Forms...
------------------------------------------------\
>> http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ << \ ...and Kill them.

a webcartoon by Howard Tayler; I like it, maybe you will too!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 03:01   #4 (permalink)
Tim Hobbs
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport

>
>Unless one is looking for an off-road vehicle (as opposed
>to a 4 wheel drive), in which case none of the vehicles above
>need apply. If LR want to compete on even terms with X5's etc
>then they need a whole new vehicle, which would no longer be
>a Land Rover and may as well have a Ford badge to avoid diluting
>even further the marques image.
>X5's etc simply reinforce the anti-4x4 peoples case and are
>gong to do untold harm to those of us who actually go off-road
>(i.e. not just National Trust car parks and insisting on
>parking with two wheels on the kerb) and/or use our vehicles
>off-road for work.
>
>Sorry if I've upset anyone, but BMW, VW, Porsch (actually VW
>with a spot of badge engineering) and even the current Shoguns
>(have a look at the ground clearance) are all utterly pointless
>vehicles - their owners would be much better off with a
>4 wheel drive MPV, though slightly less inflated ego's.
>
>Rant over!
>
>Richard


I disagree, in part. They are not pointless, though they are not
ideal as working vehicles in tough off-road conditions. Land Rover
(so far) still provide a very good vehicle for this, comparatively
small, market. Whilst the larger estates from Volvo, BMW et al do a
fine job (and I've got one), they not as good load carriers, not as
good tow vehicles and do not provide they great driving position of
the 4x4 vehicles.

I agree that 4x4 is a complete waste of a gearbox or three for many
buyers, but then again lots of people have spare bedrooms and we don't
force them to move house. It's called freedom, long may it reign.

From Land Rover's perspective, their market requires these vehicles.
That they are selling in huge numbers proves the point, as do the
waiting lists for the BMW X3 and the profit figures from the Range
Rover. If they do not respond and provide a product the market
requires they will fail as a business.

As for 'protecting the marque's image' - excuse me? They have a
lamentable reputation far and wide. Since day one every vehicle they
have produced is still the best off-roader in its class bar none,
including the Range Rover Sport. Improving quality and meeting
customer demand is the only way to improve that reputation. Pushing
the image of military equipment and agricultural machinery would be
marketing suicide.

Remember the British motorbike industry? No, neither do I.


--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'77 101FC Ambulance aka "Burrt"
'03 Volvo V70

My Landies? http://www.seriesii.co.uk
Barcoding? http://www.bartec-systems.com
Tony Luckwill web archive at http://www.luckwill.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 04:01   #5 (permalink)
beamendsltd
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport

In message <pq47515dr108nrrf8bus323t6esikv636j@4ax.com>
Austin Shackles <austinNOSPAM@ddol-las.net> wrote:

> On or around Tue, 5 Apr 2005 23:52:29 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <me@privacy.net>
> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >Just read the road test back to back of the RR Sport the equivalent X5 4.8
> >and the Porsche Cayenne Turbo in Autocar this week. Looks good even if it
> >was beaten by the X5 overall.
> >But, LR really do have to address the excess weight of their vehicles, first
> >the new Disco 3 and now the RR Sport spinoff is much heavier than it's
> >competitors with all the problems that causes for it.

>
> I gather the Cayenne is no lightweight, though - 's just got a monster
> sod-off engine...
>


...... with power and torque all in the wrong places - one
thing (up to Td5) LR always got right - the capacity and
and pure horse power are far less important that lb/ft at
low revs to those who want a *work* vehicle for off road
use - the very market LR created.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 11:01   #6 (permalink)
Bob Hobden
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport


"Austin Shackles" wrote after "Bob Hobden" enlightened us thusly:
>
>>Just read the road test back to back of the RR Sport the equivalent X5 4.8
>>and the Porsche Cayenne Turbo in Autocar this week. Looks good even if it
>>was beaten by the X5 overall.
>>But, LR really do have to address the excess weight of their vehicles,
>>first
>>the new Disco 3 and now the RR Sport spinoff is much heavier than it's
>>competitors with all the problems that causes for it.

>
> I gather the Cayenne is no lightweight, though - 's just got a monster
> sod-off engine...
>

Figures from Autocar...

BMW X5 4.8is 2275Kg. 360bhp. 369lb ft . 0-62 in 6.1 sec

LR RR Sport 2572Kg. 390bhp. 405lb ft. 0-60 in 7.2 sec

Porsche Cayenne Turbo 2355Kg. 444bhp. 457lb ft. 0-60 in 5.4 sec

So you can see the effect of the extra weight, if it was as light as the BMW
(300Kg lighter) it would be close to the Porsche in performance.

--
Regards
Bob
In Runnymede, 17 miles West of London


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 11:01   #7 (permalink)
Bob Hobden
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport


"beamendsltd" wrote

>
> Sorry if I've upset anyone, but BMW, VW, Porsch (actually VW
> with a spot of badge engineering) and even the current Shoguns
> (have a look at the ground clearance) are all utterly pointless
> vehicles - their owners would be much better off with a
> 4 wheel drive MPV, though slightly less inflated ego's.
>


A 4x4 MPV, that'll be the forthcoming Mercedes R class then.
Slightly less inflated egos? I think not. :-)

How about the proposed new Bentley 4x4 powered by the W12 450bhp engine,
that will get people up in arms in this country. A Bentley (lorry) on
stilts.
The Arabs and Yanks will love it.

--
Regards
Bob
In Runnymede, 17 miles West of London


  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 11:01   #8 (permalink)
MVP
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport

On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 17:01:13 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>
>"beamendsltd" wrote
>
>>
>> Sorry if I've upset anyone, but BMW, VW, Porsch (actually VW
>> with a spot of badge engineering) and even the current Shoguns
>> (have a look at the ground clearance) are all utterly pointless
>> vehicles - their owners would be much better off with a
>> 4 wheel drive MPV, though slightly less inflated ego's.
>>

>
>A 4x4 MPV, that'll be the forthcoming Mercedes R class then.
>Slightly less inflated egos? I think not. :-)
>
>How about the proposed new Bentley 4x4 powered by the W12 450bhp engine,
>that will get people up in arms in this country. A Bentley (lorry) on
>stilts.
>The Arabs and Yanks will love it.


Mitsubishi do a nice little 4x4 mpv, good ground clearance too, woman
near me has just got one.


Regards.
Mark.
--
_________________________________________
1984 110 CSW 2.5(na)D
(3,000 rivets flying in close formation)
www.4x4info.info
www.mvp-fine-art.co.uk
www.markvarleyphoto.co.uk
charity calendar project -
http://www.4x4info.info/calendar/
_________________________________________



.................................................................
Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
>>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<

-=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2005, 16:01   #9 (permalink)
Colonel Tupperware
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Range Rover Sport

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 23:52:29 +0100, "Bob Hobden" <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>But, LR really do have to address the excess weight of their vehicles,


Angle Grinder
YKIMS

--
ColonelTupperware,
spouting bollocks on Usenet since 1997
Usenet FAQ at
http://www.its.caltech.edu/its/servi...ws/news2.shtml
UPCE FAQ at http://upce.org.uk/ UKRM FAQ at http://www.ukrm.net/faq/
  Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Ford Cars and PAG Vehicles > PAG Vehicle Discussion > Land Rover



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 13:15.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.