2014 Range Rover Sport Final Spy Shot!

[umbertob]

Not bad, the new lightweight RRS V6 is only 0.4 sec slower to 60 than the old portly LR4 V8.*

Not a big fan of the RRS exterior, but that new interior is very nice.



*-source: Car & Driver Dec 09 - "Land Rover’s latest direct-injection 5.0-liter V-8. Result: 80 additional horses for a total of 375 hp. With 375 lb-ft of torque, the engine motivates the LR4 from 0 to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds"

I was comparing the 0-60 numbers published by Land Rover, not the highly questionable tests of C&D. According to LR, the 2010 RRS with the normally aspirated 5-liter V8 goes 0-60 in 7.2 seconds, the LR4 with the same engine in 7.5.

The bottom line is, the 2014 RRS platform is 39% lighter than the current one. That's huge, and a Supercharged V6 makes a whole lot of sense on that platform.

 

[NWLRFan]

The bottom line is, the 2014 RRS is 39% lighter than the current one.

What are the before and after weights? 39% seems a huge change!

 

[umbertob]

It does seem huge... I meant the platform is 39% lighter than the current one, my bad. The weight savings are going to be more like 800-900 lbs, depending on options. That's still impressive.

 

[Finlayforprez]

It does seem huge... I meant the platform is 39% lighter than the current one, my bad. The weight savings are going to be more like 800-900 lbs, depending on options. That's still impressive.

Does the new RRS have aluminum like the new RR?

 

[umbertob]

Yes, same aluminum platform as the new RR.

 

[Finlayforprez]

Yes, same aluminum platform as the new RR.

Ah, then I can see why the SC V6 would likely be plenty of power for most people - and those that want more, go with the SC V8.

Maybe a few of us (including me) is jumping the gun a bit thinking the 2014 LR4 will get the SC V6 engine, especially considering it would need a body update and likely go with the aluminum platform like the RR and RRS.

That's OK, I am actually glad I ordered the 2013 because I was ready and want a 2013.

-David

 

[Count Laszlo]

But it's a V6... it'll never have that grunt sound that the V8 produces. A V8 is a V8. Even if it has less horsepower. The Disco II V8 is a slug, but sounds beautiful.

IMO, I can't see Land Rover putting the V8 in the 2014 LR4. The V6 will be a dog considering power to weight ratio... but I also can't see it having a V8 and the flagship RR having a V6.

But we'll see... I'm sure there are some more surprises coming.

BTW, the new RRS is growing on me. After building it on the web site, I realized it's a hot looking truck, and it's going to sell really, really well. Everything from the advanced tech to the interior... to the beautiful interior refinement, is very appealing.

The stereo alone... yum.

BUT, have you guys noticed that not one mention on air-suspension? Is this a road-hugger only?

That's a dealbreaker.

 

[Finlayforprez]

But it's a V6... it'll never have that grunt sound that the V8 produces. A V8 is a V8. Even if it has less horsepower. The Disco II V8 is a slug, but sounds beautiful.

IMO, I can't see Land Rover putting the V8 in the 2014 LR4. The V6 will be a dog considering power to weight ratio... but I also can't see it having a V8 and the flagship RR having a V6.

But we'll see... I'm sure there are some more surprises coming.

BTW, the new RRS is growing on me. After building it on the web site, I realized it's a hot looking truck, and it's going to sell really, really well. Everything from the advanced tech to the interior... to the beautiful interior refinement, is very appealing.

The stereo alone... yum.

BUT, have you guys noticed that not one mention on air-suspension? Is this a road-hugger only?

That's a dealbreaker.

I was also playing around on the website (even though the interface is a bit odd) and was surprised at how customizable the new RRS is and the many color combinations available. It really is a brilliant vehicle, even if we don't particularly care for the design. I agree with you, this is definitely going to sell quite well.

I wondered about the air suspension, but haven't seen much. My guess is that LR wants it to be more of a road-hugger because that is the typical demographic who will buy the RRS. They want something nimble and sleek and likely don't care much about off-road aside from once in a while dirt roads or skiing trips. I am thinking that if someone REALLY is into off-roading, they likely won't go for the RRS.

I just hope that good sales of the Evoque and new RRS will allow the engineers to keep the off-road heritage of the Discovery and Defender.

I wonder when we will officially hear about the 2014 LR4?

-David

 

[ssmrubicon]

In the technical specs it shows something like 8.4" standard clearance and 10.6" I believe for off road which may be better than the current model but I'm not 100% sure. That would require the air suspension.

 

[Count Laszlo]

In the technical specs it shows something like 8.4" standard clearance and 10.6" I believe for off road which may be better than the current model but I'm not 100% sure. That would require the air suspension.

Make sense... if it was a fixed suspension then it'd be a dealbreaker for me.

I read the wading has also increased quite a bit. With "wading" warning/or level detection.

The third-row optoin puts the MRSP through the roof though. Hmmm...