Official 2014 Changes to LR4

[Agarabaghi]

11 speaker meridian audio... seems like a downgrade...

 

[PaulLR3]

So, I'm glad I ordered my 2013 HSE Lux with heavy duty package. Last of the LR4's with a V8, transfer case & heavy duty package.

The problem I see is Land Rover trying to sell the V6, single speed transfer case LR4 against competitors like the X5 and Q7. We had a 4.2 Q7, and if I wanted an on-road-only SUV, the Q7 wins easily. It simply handles better, is more agile and drives more like an A4 than the big vehicle it is.

 

[Quijote]

Well, there are many reasons why I like the LR4, but what won it for us is that it is a full foot shorter than the Q7 and other competitors while still having a great third row and lot so storage.

We have an annoyingly shallow attached garage and already with just 6" between the rear bumper and the door, that only leaves 18" from the front bumper to the short staircase to the house. An additional foot was a no-go.

 

[TangoRed]

And when they do tell this tale, and you know they will, to move 90% of these watered-down units off the lot to unbeknownst and uneducated consumers who think they're buying into the "go-anywhere Land Rover brand", and these things get stuck left-and-right, and these consumer-types (which is a HUGE web-savvy pool) voice their disappointment online --- pointing out the LR puffery, the brand will suffer a slow retail death which frankly LR cannot afford!

Woof. Lay off the caffeine. This LR4 isn't going to get stuck left-and-right because no one is going to be taking them off-road in the first place. I seriously doubt most people who drive these even know how to engage low range. The soft roading they actually engage in (driving across a field, for example) will be unaffected by this change. Those who do need it will buy it as an option.

The LR is now no different than the X5, Lexus RX, ML, etc.. I just don't get it. This silly thing called a transfer case was a major product differentiation from the competition.

This is like Swiss Army deciding to remove the fishing-hook from pocket knife to save a few bucks because 90% of people don't use them. Well, I have a Swiss Army knife, and although I don't use the fishing-hook, I know it's there if I ever need it in a dire situation!!! The same goes for the transfer case.

Fun fact: The Mercedes ML can be optioned with a 2-speed transfer case, HDC, skid plates, etc.

I like your Swiss Army knife analogy. However, I bet the Swiss Army knife market has either remained stagnant or dwindled. That's opposite of what LR is trying to do by doing everything it can to boost mpg's.

To be honest, I think the general public will jump at the new 2014 LR4. Those who want more Land Rover heritage and the V8, well, it will make our 2010 to 2013 vehicle resale value go up.

Agreed.

The problem I see is Land Rover trying to sell the V6, single speed transfer case LR4 against competitors like the X5 and Q7. We had a 4.2 Q7, and if I wanted an on-road-only SUV, the Q7 wins easily. It simply handles better, is more agile and drives more like an A4 than the big vehicle it is.

To me, it sounds like what you're saying is worst-case scenario, the sales don't change. LR knows the majority of its customers 1) don't take it's customers off-road and 2) want something better than 12mpg city. They're willing to take some sacrifices- same 0-60mph time and better fuel economy? They won't even notice the transfer case is gone. Let's not even talk about the upgraded aesthetics.

 

[LR34]

They're willing to take some sacrifices- same 0-60mph time and better fuel economy? They won't even notice the transfer case is gone. Let's not even talk about the upgraded aesthetics.

Not the same 0-60. And what upgraded aesthetics?

 

[Quijote]

Not the same 0-60.

I agree. Not only is the new car objectively slower in terms of instrumented tests, it will FEEL much slower and sound a LOT worse.

But as I mentioned, it's all relative. The V6 is a good engine. People who are unaware of just how nice the V8 was will probably feel like it's a nice enough car.

But the V8 offers that luxurious feel that no V6 can offer. That was a big selling point of the LR4. People spending $55k+ on a large SUV are typicaly not your Civic crowd concerned about mpg's. Instead, they would highlight the awesomeness of the V8 and point out that to get a similarly nice V8 from the Germans you have to cough up $10k+. This is (well, was) true.

Now you don't have that. Maybe your economy won't suck so much, but I doubt it will match the German V6's purely because of weight. So you are likely to still be down on mpg (but at least not embarrassingly so), and now you lost that huge selling point of offering a luxury V8.

Let's not forget that they do sell non-insignificant numbers of ML550's and V8 X5's.

And really, does the LR4 compete against the ML or the GL? Because the latter can't be had without a V8 except for the uber-awesome and super torque-rich diesel V6. MB knows they would not move GL's if the stuck in the V6 gas engine. It is too heavy.

 

[TangoRed]

I agree. Not only is the new car objectively slower in terms of instrumented tests, it will FEEL much slower and sound a LOT worse.

But as I mentioned, it's all relative. The V6 is a good engine. People who are unaware of just how nice the V8 was will probably feel like it's a nice enough car.

But the V8 offers that luxurious feel that no V6 can offer. That was a big selling point of the LR4. People spending $55k+ on a large SUV are typicaly not your Civic crowd concerned about mpg's. Instead, they would highlight the awesomeness of the V8 and point out that to get a similarly nice V8 from the Germans you have to cough up $10k+. This is (well, was) true.

Sorry, I considered .2sec slower to 60 as insignificant (it is). Although I'm sure you'll feel the difference more at 80mph. On the contrary, people who buy this SUV's are concerned about fuel economy. They're not concerned to the level of a Prius owner, but they want something better than what the LR4 currently offers. And let's be honest, the only reason the LR4 had a standard V8 in the first place was because it's speed was off the pace of its competitors' V6 models.

Now you don't have that. Maybe your economy won't suck so much, but I doubt it will match the German V6's purely because of weight. So you are likely to still be down on mpg (but at least not embarrassingly so), and now you lost that huge selling point of offering a luxury V8.

Let's not forget that they do sell non-insignificant numbers of ML550's and V8 X5's.

Your points on economy and speed are true, but I think the supercharged is a better compromise of speed and efficiency than the current powerplant. But it definitely is a compromise...

Also, the ML550 sells in such small numbers that it's basically a order-only model at dealers. They don't have them in stock often, because consumers go straight for the ML63 or stick to the diesel/gas ML350. Not sure about the X5 V8 take rate.

And really, does the LR4 compete against the ML or the GL? Because the latter can't be had without a V8 except for the uber-awesome and super torque-rich diesel V6. MB knows they would not move GL's if the stuck in the V6 gas engine. It is too heavy.

That's a great question. MB also has gotten it's V8's up to an acceptable consumption level, so there's no need to even consider the gas V6.

I would imagine the LR4 is not often cross shopped with the GL. The GL is considerably bigger than the LR4, costs much more, and competes directly with the Cadillac Escalade, Infiniti QX56, and now (I suppose) the 7-seat Range Rover Sport.

 

[Quijote]

Sorry, I considered .2sec slower to 60 as insignificant (it is). Although I'm sure you'll feel the difference more at 80mph. On the contrary, people who buy this SUV's are concerned about fuel economy. They're not concerned to the level of a Prius owner, but they want something better than what the LR4 currently offers. And let's be honest, the only reason the LR4 had a standard V8 in the first place was because it's speed was off the pace of its competitors' V6 models.

I agree that it is hardly slower, but it is. Anyway, the point is that it will not feel like the V8, especially of idle where the supercharger is not yet doing it's job. I'd love to see dyno plots of the two engines over one another. Anyone can rig a good 0-60 number (which is, IMO, about the worst measure of real performance). 30-50 or 50-70 is where it's at. I don't disagree regarding the reason why the V8 was there. But like it or not, it offered good value that other were charging an arm and a leg for.

Your points on economy and speed are true, but I think the supercharged is a better compromise of speed and efficiency than the current powerplant. But it definitely is a compromise...

Also, the ML550 sells in such small numbers that it's basically a order-only model at dealers. They don't have them in stock often, because consumers go straight for the ML63 or stick to the diesel/gas ML350. Not sure about the X5 V8 take rate.

The V6 is a very reasonable engine choice, no doubt. Again, those who don't know what they could have gotten probably won't care. Sure ML550 & ML63's sell in small numbers, but so do LR4's and the LR4 needs the V8 more than the ML.

That's a great question. MB also has gotten it's V8's up to an acceptable consumption level, so there's no need to even consider the gas V6.

I would imagine the LR4 is not often cross shopped with the GL. The GL is considerably bigger than the LR4, costs much more, and competes directly with the Cadillac Escalade, Infiniti QX56, and now (I suppose) the 7-seat Range Rover Sport.

I would agree, but there are several online comparisons were they are put up against one another as a result of having a good 3rd row.

 

[GermanRoots]

Not the same 0-60.

What am I missing here? The 2013 has a 0-60 time of 7.5, the 2014 is stated to have a 0-60 time of 7.7. Losing two-tenths of a second seems like a pretty insignificant loss. Especially if picking up 5-6 mpg improvement. Thoughts?

Also, I agree with not feeling as fast or sounding as powerful. I also beleive it will lose towing capacity...curious what those numbers are.

 

[Quijote]

What am I missing here? The 2013 has a 0-60 time of 7.5, the 2014 is stated to have a 0-60 time of 7.7. Losing two-tenths of a second seems like a pretty insignificant loss. Especially if picking up 5-6 mpg improvement. Thoughts?

Also, I agree with not feeling as fast or sounding as powerful. I also beleive it will lose towing capacity...curious what those numbers are.

Those are factory numbers. C&D got the V8 to do 6.6 seconds 0-60.

Ever notice how Porsche's numbers are at least at least 0.1 slower if the car is cheaper?

Don't listen to me. Read reviews from when the Jag ditched the V8 in favor of the V6. Who cares about the numbers. The car will be slower.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcqImqjF5eg