LR5 Release Updates?

[DWarner]

I tend to hold judgement on body shapes until the vehicle has been in circulation for about 18 months.

Lots of times, our initial impression of a vehicle is better than it will be after we've been exposed to the model for some time. Think PT Cruiser... Super hot seller to a car nobody wanted...Looked retro and unique at first, later more like a big ugly jellybean...

And other times, we may not be too impressed with a body shape initially, only to grow fond of the vehicles lines over time. For me, a car like Chevy's last gen Monte Carlo is an example of that. I don't like curvy body lines usually, but it worked for the Monte, and when you see older models that have been well taken care of, it's a pretty classy shape for an American car.

So I'm holding judgement until I see the truck in the real world environment, with different wheel and tire packages, colorways, and a better understanding of how it sizes up versus it's contemporaries.

If I was looking to purchase one, the number one thing I'd hope was changed would be a better access/storage situation for the rear gate as well as the second and third rows.

It's highly inconvenient as constructed and really dated compared to many competitors. Even mid-level SUV's from Nissan and Honda, who've had all electric systems for 4 or 5 years, are better equipped in that area. LR owners should be able to expect to just push a button to lower and raise the door and seats when they shell out 60k for a vehicle.

 

[Longhorn]

While I agree with holding off on an impression and your PT Cruiser analogy, kind of like picking up that "cute" girl at the pub only to think a month later, what was I thinking. I don't necessarily agree in the reverse.

I look at the "growing fond" similar to putting on rose colored glasses and after time, your brain simply adjusts to the color and it no longer has that pink hue, but looks normal. While we don't have a good picture of these on the road, there are some undeniable facts.

1) it is no longer a unique SUV, it looks like so many other SUVs on the road.
2) no matter how you cut it, they lost cargo space by cutting in the rear tailgate rather than keeping it flat. We have 4 tall, giant breed dogs and one of the things that drew us to our first LR4 was the headroom the design offered. That's lost when the tailgate cuts forward as it does in virtually all other SUVs.
3) It lost functionality by eliminating the split tailgate. I hate putting our dogs in our Suburban because of the single tailgate and the constant juggling act of trying to keep them at bay why the hatch fully opens or having your groceries falling out while the hatch opens. I much prefer having the split tailgate to hold things in until I want to remove them.
4) I can't count the number of times I've bumped the key fob and my electric tailgate begins to close while I'm loading cargo. I much prefer to close the tailgate when I want to close the tailgate.
5) Our Suburban has electric seats, never use the "feature". I mean how often are you really reconfiguring your seating arrangement? 90+% of the time I'd be most people don't change their configuration all that often.

 

[DWarner]

While I agree with holding off on an impression and your PT Cruiser analogy, kind of like picking up that "cute" girl at the pub only to think a month later, what was I thinking. I don't necessarily agree in the reverse.

I look at the "growing fond" similar to putting on rose colored glasses and after time, your brain simply adjusts to the color and it no longer has that pink hue, but looks normal. While we don't have a good picture of these on the road, there are some undeniable facts.

1) it is no longer a unique SUV, it looks like so many other SUVs on the road.
2) no matter how you cut it, they lost cargo space by cutting in the rear tailgate rather than keeping it flat. We have 4 tall, giant breed dogs and one of the things that drew us to our first LR4 was the headroom the design offered. That's lost when the tailgate cuts forward as it does in virtually all other SUVs.
3) It lost functionality by eliminating the split tailgate. I hate putting our dogs in our Suburban because of the single tailgate and the constant juggling act of trying to keep them at bay why the hatch fully opens or having your groceries falling out while the hatch opens. I much prefer having the split tailgate to hold things in until I want to remove them.
4) I can't count the number of times I've bumped the key fob and my electric tailgate begins to close while I'm loading cargo. I much prefer to close the tailgate when I want to close the tailgate.
5) Our Suburban has electric seats, never use the "feature". I mean how often are you really reconfiguring your seating arrangement? 90+% of the time I'd be most people don't change their configuration all that often.

I agree sometimes we make excuses for certain vehicles over time, but we also have the luxury of time in making our assessments with this methodology, rather than jumping to an immediate conclusion like we do with our initial impression.

As to your comments regarding the new truck that we haven't seen in real-time as of yet:

I also agree it appears to be losing some of it's individuality. The Disco was really the last truck bearing the LR badge that was boxy, and it looks like that will be no more. Those of us who have the older models should appreciate that...

But I will say, there's flattery in this. The new truck is more in line with the products they've been producing for a few years now. The Ford Explorer took it's cues, from the body shape to the grille, from LR's, not vice versa. The new Durango took it's more rounded shaping cues from BMW SAV's, not vice-versa. So the Euro's are still the design standard makers.

And in the automotive design game over the past couple decades, we've seen a lack of imagination and a lot of emulation. Designers don't want to take risks. They want to sell units, and they tend to copy other products that have done just that.

Your points about storage convenience are all valid... I like the split tailgate as well, but a button or leg swipe under the vehicle to lift and close the top portion would be convenient to most buyers I'd think. And almost an assumption considering the price of the truck...

Your point about reconfiguration also makes sense. Most people won't make changes daily... But we're spending 60 grand. Should it be inconvenient to operate when trucks that cost half that make much more sensible systems? And it's 2016. The technology is out there. It should be included on a premium vehicle in my mind.

And for us, the third row was a major determining factor in purchasing a vehicle, as we have teenagers who are constantly being shuffled with their friends from place to place. We'd never consider any 5 seat SUV but we don't always use the third row, so sometimes we like it down for storage. This is the first truck we've owned in the last 20 years that my wife needs to call me to help her with the back seat prep.

So while it's tolerable, it certainly isn't convenient. As a result, I'll be shocked if they don't address this issue going forward.

 

[ryanjl]

The Ford Explorer took it's cues, from the body shape to the grille, from LR's, not vice versa.

The Ford Explorer that most resembles Land Rover's current lines came out in '11; modern Land Rover lines debuted with the newest Range Rover in '13. I'd always assumed that the newest Land Rover lines were conceptualized under Ford's ownership, and Ford saw an opportunity to beat Land Rover to the punch once they sold the brand.

Regardless of whether the LR5 looks good--and I think we've seen plenty of it to get a pretty good idea of what it's going to look like--anyone who likes the way it looks can buy a Range Rover Sport right now. Why do they need two vehicles that look nearly identical when there's a huge, gaping hole in the lineup of a marque that touts itself as one of premium off-road heritage?

 

[Longhorn]

I agree sometimes we make excuses for certain vehicles over time, but we also have the luxury of time in making our assessments with this methodology, rather than jumping to an immediate conclusion like we do with our initial impression.

As to your comments regarding the new truck that we haven't seen in real-time as of yet:

I also agree it appears to be losing some of it's individuality. The Disco was really the last truck bearing the LR badge that was boxy, and it looks like that will be no more. Those of us who have the older models should appreciate that...

But I will say, there's flattery in this. The new truck is more in line with the products they've been producing for a few years now. The Ford Explorer took it's cues, from the body shape to the grille, from LR's, not vice versa. The new Durango took it's more rounded shaping cues from BMW SAV's, not vice-versa. So the Euro's are still the design standard makers.

And in the automotive design game over the past couple decades, we've seen a lack of imagination and a lot of emulation. Designers don't want to take risks. They want to sell units, and they tend to copy other products that have done just that.

Your points about storage convenience are all valid... I like the split tailgate as well, but a button or leg swipe under the vehicle to lift and close the top portion would be convenient to most buyers I'd think. And almost an assumption considering the price of the truck...

Your point about reconfiguration also makes sense. Most people won't make changes daily... But we're spending 60 grand. Should it be inconvenient to operate when trucks that cost half that make much more sensible systems? And it's 2016. The technology is out there. It should be included on a premium vehicle in my mind.

And for us, the third row was a major determining factor in purchasing a vehicle, as we have teenagers who are constantly being shuffled with their friends from place to place. We'd never consider any 5 seat SUV but we don't always use the third row, so sometimes we like it down for storage. This is the first truck we've owned in the last 20 years that my wife needs to call me to help her with the back seat prep.

So while it's tolerable, it certainly isn't convenient. As a result, I'll be shocked if they don't address this issue going forward.

You've mentioned the price a number of times as if that is the explanation for abandoning the more utilitarian design. Have you priced out a Jeep Wrangler Unlimited? A Rubicon will cost you $50-60k. They come with none of the "creature" amenities that some feel must be included in a $60k truck, yet they don't have any trouble selling those trucks because they fit a market segment. The current body style fills a market segment. The new body style wants to fit a different market segment, a market segment very crowded with other established competition.

I went through a similar thing when Porsche abandoned their air cooled boxer engines in the 911 and went liquid cooled. Sure the new engines performed fantastic and there was no need to worry anymore about sitting in traffic in triple digit temps, but much was lost in the mystique of those old boxer engines - the sound, the smell, etc. You get used to the new engines but there's still nothing like a pre-996 body style 911.

 

[SHS14]

The Ford Explorer that most resembles Land Rover's current lines came out in '11; modern Land Rover lines debuted with the newest Range Rover in '13. I'd always assumed that the newest Land Rover lines were conceptualized under Ford's ownership, and Ford saw an opportunity to beat Land Rover to the punch once they sold the brand.

Regardless of whether the LR5 looks good--and I think we've seen plenty of it to get a pretty good idea of what it's going to look like--anyone who likes the way it looks can buy a Range Rover Sport right now. Why do they need two vehicles that look nearly identical when there's a huge, gaping hole in the lineup of a marque that touts itself as one of premium off-road heritage?

Ford is a massive company compared to Land Rover.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ryanjl]

Ford is a massive company compared to Land Rover.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Wasn't aware.

 

[DWarner]

The Ford Explorer that most resembles Land Rover's current lines came out in '11; modern Land Rover lines debuted with the newest Range Rover in '13. I'd always assumed that the newest Land Rover lines were conceptualized under Ford's ownership, and Ford saw an opportunity to beat Land Rover to the punch once they sold the brand.

Regardless of whether the LR5 looks good--and I think we've seen plenty of it to get a pretty good idea of what it's going to look like--anyone who likes the way it looks can buy a Range Rover Sport right now. Why do they need two vehicles that look nearly identical when there's a huge, gaping hole in the lineup of a marque that touts itself as one of premium off-road heritage?

The Explorer did debut before the current models of LR's but the current design of the LR's has been something in the works for some time. One might even say that the current lineup is resembling the last generation Range Rovers. In fact the similarities between the vehicles are likely even greater than we can imagine.... There's this to consider...

The development of the fifth generation Explorer was led by chief engineer Jim Holland, who was also a chief engineer for Land Rover; heading development of the Land Rover Range Rover (L322) 2005 face-lift. Holland also worked on the Ford Expedition (U324) during its initial development.

As we see above, Jim Holland was chief engineer on the previous model Range Rovers and the current model Ford Explorer. Should we really assume there would be no cross-engineering?

Perhaps Jim was privy to future LR designs and utilized some of that knowledge when he took over the Ford seat. Just as current designers at Adidas previously were employed at Nike and are bringing that experience with them, to enhance a product that needs it badly through proven design methods...

Thus, the similarities of the models exist. When the facelift model of the Explorer arrived, with the newly designed grille, Jim probably felt like he was able to see his vision for the Ford Rover like product come full circle. And to me, it's clearly the best looking Explorer to date... So again, it's flattery that when people see the Explorer it makes them think of a Land Rover. But what's odd, I'll bet you that when most people see a Land Rover, they don't conjure up images of the Explorer..

You've mentioned the price a number of times as if that is the explanation for abandoning the more utilitarian design. Have you priced out a Jeep Wrangler Unlimited? A Rubicon will cost you $50-60k. They come with none of the "creature" amenities that some feel must be included in a $60k truck, yet they don't have any trouble selling those trucks because they fit a market segment. The current body style fills a market segment. The new body style wants to fit a different market segment, a market segment very crowded with other established competition.

I went through a similar thing when Porsche abandoned their air cooled boxer engines in the 911 and went liquid cooled. Sure the new engines performed fantastic and there was no need to worry anymore about sitting in traffic in triple digit temps, but much was lost in the mystique of those old boxer engines - the sound, the smell, etc. You get used to the new engines but there's still nothing like a pre-996 body style 911.

While I'm a big fan of the 993 and the air cooled engines, and agree that the pre-996 body car represented the pinnacle of the Porsche marquee, primarily for the reasons you mentioned, it's obvious that we're over-valuing nostalgia if we would wish for that to stand in the way of the progress Porsche has made. This current generation 911 is the best ever. Put it head to head versus a 1997 of the same line and the new one beats the old one every time. Probably gets better gas mileage in doing so, and is quieter to boot. Nostalgia is great but undermines reality. I'm a big basketball guy. Dr.J is my favorite player of all time. But it doesn't blur my vision of seeing that LeBron James is better in every metric.

So while I admit there's a good size niche group of enthusiasts who didn't want the car tampered with, progress is progress. And while your competitors are progressing, you better put off an image of doing the same I'd think...

As for the price issue and the notion that the LR fills the needs of a certain segment...

What segment exactly would you say the current LR4 is reaching? Is it primarily driven seriously as an off road vehicle by men? Or is it primarily driven to the grocery store or to transport kids by women?

Give me a ratio you think those two segment represent of current LR4 daily drivers. For me, it's probably around 10% off road and 90% on. Regardless of drivers gender. And I'd think the majority of these vehicles are being operated daily more regularly by women than men. I might be wrong, but it seems that way...

So if that scenario above is close to the case, I'd think women, and most other on-road drivers of the trucks would appreciate more convenience...

The Jeep product you mentioned is targeted for the more serious off-roader. So the amenities aren't necessary, regardless of price point. The number of women who drive that vehicle is also probably a bit smaller than the percentage of women in LR's...

A Land Rover is still a luxury vehicle despite its off road prowess. Luxury vehicles tend to include options like the one we're discussing. Automatic tailgates and rear seats.

Our previous truck was a Denali XL. Had auto everything. Before that, a Cadillac Escalade, same thing. Auto tailgate and rear seats. Both around 60 grand at the time of release.

The other day I assisted my father in law in the purchase of a 2013 Infinity SUV as he's a big Nissan guy. Before that he owned an Armada, and two Pathfinders. Every one had auto tailgates at a price point under 60k.

So because price is generally the #1 factor in a persons purchase, I find it relevant. We want the most vehicle that we can get for the money we can afford to spend...On top of that, I don't see any Land Rover as part of any niche club except those of the well-to-do in many cases. A luxury brand. Where every model should be equipped with high level options.

There may be a people like yourself who favor utility over convenience. And I can see how there are times when one might favor it. But for the average driver of these vehicles, I believe, not only do they expect to see automatic tailgates and similar amenities, they're surprised when they don't have them, and would welcome them if they could get 'em...

 

[Longhorn]

We will certainly see what the final product looks like, however they could have "updated" the model with all the stuff you feel is necessary at the given price point without losing it's uniqueness. The RR has an auto split tailgate. An auto tailgate didn't have to cut into the roofline. They could have softened the edges of it's current form without making it look like every other SUV in the market. They already have the RRS with all those bells and whistles. The only thing missing is the larger seating capacity.

 

[danrhiggins]

As for the "typical" LR4 driver, in our area (south Denver) it is very rare to see a late model LR4 that is used off road. I would continually get comments at the dealership, and elsewhere, something like, "Wow, its so cool to see you actually using your LR4 for what it was designed." And most of the drivers are women though it feels more like 60-40. The Land Rovers that are taken off road tend are nearly always used and often LR3s or Discoverys or earlier model RR.

I had noticed that LR is certainly not alone with the flattened, more "aerodynamic" body style. I noticed yesterday that the Honda Passport, which used to be boxy, is almost indistinguishable in the new, rounder, flattened body style. When I bought my 2014 Acura MDX it was definitely lower and sleeker. They even dropped the ground clearance by an inch. And they sell like hotcakes around here. And, BTW, there are a lot of Ford Explorers around here as well. Even my 2016 Land Cruiser feels a bit lower. So what LR is doing is pretty much consistent with the trend of the past few years.

Then, as I am sitting in Starbucks right now, this just drove past me in the drive through lane. Yep, orange accents everywhere.