Today I so wished to be in RR Hybrid. Instead I was sitting in traffic jam with manual box and warning light saying "Low fuel level" :D Keep doing this, XCAR ;) Really enjoyed, thanks
This is the best review of a vehicle I've seen and it's about time someone did some real off-road work with a Range Rover. I'm afraid he could be right about the traditional Rover buyer, but it's good to see them explore a 'hybrid' vehicle.
I just don't understand why about every journalist thinks the fuel consumtpion is only about money... There's something like range, which is more important for me. I just don't like stoppig at gas stations every 200km....
Very ture. Range is important no matter how rich you are. That's why the Panamera Diesel exists. Not to save money at the petrol station, Mr. Manager wants to go cross country without having to refill. Not really sure why all journalists are so close-minded on this topic
I totally agree. 3.0 biturbo diesel is my favourite all around engine as for now. It has 313 hp, great torque from the bottom, and low fuel consumption. Great choice! A6?
My parents own 2 of the 2014 Range Rover autobiographies. One is a hybrid and one is the V8. Honestly I like the hybrid one better. It's a vast improvement when it comes to filling the tank. And every little bit helps the Earth. Also when it comes to people concerned with power they do not care about the hybrid. But it's whatever makes u happy. If ur spending $100 grand on a car get what u want.
I had a 1984 Range Rover, 4 Door, 3.5lt V8, Petrol "SE" in Africa. I needed something I could use around the farm and with enough power to pull a heavy Horsebox, in comfort.. The "Ranger" did it all beautifully and would go anywhere EXCEPT past a Petrol pump..!! LOL When pulling the "box" and using aircon on occasion. on a long run, I managed 8 MILES per Gallon..!!... So a more fuel efficient Range Rover with ALL It's capabilities, is I reckon a welcome addition to the matque..!!
I'm a Cadillac man myself, but I know for a fact that Range Rover is the premier SUV. The functionality of the Range Rover is what sets it apart from the other SUV's out there in my opinion.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is one the best if not THE best car in the world right now. Nothing on God's Earth offers off-road capability and refinement in one vehicle. This is an engineering master class
With the abysmal state of UK roads these days, I wouldn't care what the proles think either. The Range Rover, if you can afford it, is THE car to have.
I was wondering the same thing. I'm thinking of Switzerland because there is this sticker (vignette) on the top left of the RR's windshield. You need that if you want to use the swiss motorways. But yeah, the car could also have gone through Switzerland and this could have been shot somewhere else...
Love RR but hate the sloping roof line from the Evoque and the Ford headlights. Wished they kept the old style and made it lighter and more fuel effecient.
A few people missing the point here... It's not the customer demand, it's the future to stay in business. Take a look at the fines on the following link: ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/vehicles/cars/index_en.htm
Why? Because its the best SUV and is still very practical. S-class comfort, Land Cruiser/G-class off-road capability and a good fuel economy in the diesel hybrid. That is world class engineering. And there are some intangibles in the mix. The commanding driving position, the elegant styling and the strength of the Range Rover brand. What other SUV can compare with the Range Rover?
+A Sam A Sam, I had a '85 300GD. Off-road that thing run like a tank, but tbh I was more impressed with the 4x4 system of the Mitsubishi Montero IO I bought later.
+A Sam The G-class received mostly interior and cosmetic improvements. The 4x4 system improved to a permanent one (which means can be used on-road) and electric locking differentials. Sure the engine got tremendously more power and torque, but overall wouldn't say that impact the off-road capabilities that much, given that it already had low gears. The Land Rover 4x4 technology is more advanced, off-road the Rangie is limited only by its dimensions.
Just picked up my TDV6 Vogue SE and love it! It's replaced a 2008 TDV8. The new car has similar performance being 420kg lighter - but does over 700 miles on an 86 litre tank of diesel! Shame they didn't give it the 105 litre tank of the SDV8, so it went even further. It's not about fuel consumption it's about Range...
The point of it is that it's an alternative to those who can afford an autobiography spec range rover, one less sdv8 on the road and one more hybrid isn't a bad thing at all. Makes sense to me, and maybe in the future the hybrid systems will trickle down to the other trim levels and even Evoque and RRS... P.S. I want one lol
Looks like a great car , I would buy one right now , if I could afford one . Good video , thank you . I like your practicals , please were did you get them , what make are they and number and how much are they . Really I´m so glad I saw this video , I may be able to afford them..
I'm a massive nerd and I would have this over the supercharged version lol, also I think people are more aware of what's coming out the exhausts nowa days so this will sell to wealthy hippies with three kids
This is almost my perfect car, if only LR put that hybird systerm into the base Range Rover model. Before they do, I'll stick to my Subaru Forester as all the car I'll need.
I love range rovers but there is a sense of impracticality with them and that is price and reliability. I would prefer Acura MDX or BMW X5 but MDX more so for all the things a range rover can do (Yes, even serious off roading). But, if you can live without luxury then Subaru Forester is your option.
When you buy a car by over 100,000 usd , I do not think the fuel economy is an issue !!!more over an SUV can't be an environmental friendly with hybrid engine unless it's completely electronic like the "Tesla" Otherwise get cheve volt or walk like I used to do ;)...
Indeed. Also, good luck exploring much of the outback in the 5 liter supercharged version. Stopping to refill every 200 hundred miles would put a damper on that.
The answer to the "WHY" is that time is money which is especially important to those people who can afford a $100,000 range rover. An executive can earn back hours of time by having to go the pump less often. Which means more time to close those multi-million dollar deals. And sometimes stopping for gas could be the difference between being late to a meeting.
Alan Akeister Really. In the UK they have been at or very near the bottom of reliability charts for years. I worked on them for 20yrs. Atrocious reliability for a premium price.
***** Sorry mate, but they have address all the flaws of the past... This new one doesn't suffer any of the bugs that used to plague the brand... Remember, BMW and Mercedes also used to suffer gremlins... They're not that stupid...
You would need to add a bit of range also. Make it able to do 50+km on battery alone, and you could do a lot of daily driving without ever using fuel. That's when a plug-in makes sense.
Well the price difference to the V6, is enough for a lot and a lot of fuel... beside that when the batteries reach is end cycle, the cost of replacement, is enough for a lot of fuel... so economy isn't the key... but the technology and the fact of having an engine that feels like a V8, and works with less fuel, may be the key, to those who don't care for speed but do care for performance!
+Carfection What would be the mpg if this very car has this same engine but without hybrid setup? Do consider the less added weight. I think it will be roughly the same as diesel has on average higher mpg's
I'm thinking about leaning towards a range rover if I was to get a SUV sometime in the future. But I just don't like the fact that the body kit almost looks like Ford's suv. That's the big draw back
Hybrid technology makes sense in an SUV... the journalist needs to open his mind! At that price point of course owners can pay for gas but maybe some of them don't want to. And they won't have to look for a gas station several times a week...
I think Land Rover should consider putting this powerplant into a lower tier Range Rover. I think it will fare better than people having to fork out Autobiography money to get a more eco friendly SUV...
the fact is that if you need a fast car and if you like the big engine noises all time so you need the V8 supercharged but if you are like me , a person who loves speed but sometimes you just wanna drive it silently and don't look like a young idiot in a imposing car so you need the hybrid (even if you don't care about fuel consumption)
New Range Rover is NOT 420 kg lighter than previous version. New V6 is 420 kg lighter than previous V8, but when you compare them with same engine the difference is 280 kg
ppl who may buy this hybrid instead of supercharged v8 doesnt really care the fuel efficiency but just wants to be looked as eco friendly smart ppl. thats it.
i am worried that all of this off road suvs going aliminium body because it gets toren up really quickly especially when you tow heavy stuff or go on rigid or intense offroading then it will cost you so much to fix it. I guarentee you that if you tow a trailer over 1,5 tonn it will have tear on front side of RR in 5 yrs. most of the owners dont own the RR over 3.5-4 yrs so the manifacturers will not give damn about the quality, so it means resell value for RR gonna be suck as it is previous model.
Why they bother to build a hybrid version of the autobiography Range Rover? well, because while the owner can enjoy its luxurious interior and offroad capability while saving fuel, the question should be Why Not?
2 reasons why that car doesn't need Hybrid version: it's already quiet and smooth inside and the drivers(owners) don't care about economies or saving fuel. 1 reason why it's need to be hybrid, pressure from the market...
Did he say 1 mile on EV?! Little wonder the kit is only 120kg - 1 mile on EV is what most vehicles could get out of their standard lead acid battery running the starter motor! Seriously a Tesla is a heavy car that uses around 350Wh per mile, and I have a 1.5 Dacia with a battery capacity over 500Wh.
Here is why, people want to buy a luxury car that is also eco friendly. Well, not BMW i3 eco friendy, but eco friendlier. All of the top spec exclusive vehicles back in the day have always been huge gas guzzlers with standard V8 engines and larger, and for companies to bring out alternatives for people who have a lot of money is a good idea. If i was CEO of a large company a coupe of years ago i would probably drive around in a S class or a RR, not a prius. But now that there are alternatives on the way i think we will see a change to hybrids pretty soon.
worst thing you can do to the environment is to buy an all electric car, second is a hybrid. gasoline is still the best fuel for modern vehicles and the next generation. what you are looking for is a move away from hybrids from being a fad, and into a future where people strive for the best in a vehicle and not simply a sticker on the side
whiteandnerdytuba The worst thing you can buy today is a gasoline car, why should you pollute the air and consume the earths resources if there is a emissions free alternative? Sure, all ways of generating electric isn't emissions free. But you can make an active choice and choose where you power comes from. And i truly believe that hybrids are the gateway to a future with 100% electric vehicles.
you are looking at a young chicken and a grown up chicken, without thinking about how the egg was created in the first place. all current electric cars put out more "emissions" than gas cars. the process needed to make the vehicles pollutes so much of the world that if the car produces no emissions, it is still worse for the long term environment than a vehicle that uses gasoline. hybrids are even worse using both gas and electric.
whiteandnerdytuba Well, look back in time and you will see the same thing with gasoline cars. With time comes refinement, without producing electric cars how will we evolve them into something bigger and better. Take a look at the BMW i3, it's mostly made from materials commonly used today. Sure it has some rare metals in the electric motor, speed controllers and batteries but if we don't experiment with the techniques in developing and producing these type of things, how will we get better? If no one buys any electric cars how will manufacturers find incentive to keep developing them? Because we can't run on fossil fuels forever. The emissions created from developing and producing these cars will pollute the air, today or fifty years from now. So if we make the transition to electric as soon as possible we will have a proven and tested method when the resources start to dry out, will it be two years or two thousand years from now, it doesn't really matter. Because we will eventually have to do it.
the i3 is the first car that you cant drive with gas in the tank, it uses exotic materials to account for the 50k price tag and a bmw badge and yet is no more competitive than a focus electric. pathetic. there are more alternatives than all electric and pure gas. most of which are more reasonable. electric cars are not a new idea. the fad has simply returned again and only tesla has a clue
