This past weekend I had a chance to drive one of my friend's Land Rover LR4. My first impression was that it was huge. I sat a good foot or more higher than in my S-Type. The seats in the S-Type were a lot more comfortable however. On the road, the LR4 drove a lot like a truck understandably but I was a bit surprised at the lack of low-end torque. While driving on the GW Parkway I kept shifting to either fourth or fifth in order to keep on the boil somewhat. My friend said it had 500 hp, but no way IMHO. My S-Type seemed a bit quicker even though it has the V6. The LR4 was better for my friend in that he had small kids and parents to haul around. The LR4's entertainment system keeps the kids amused most of the time which is good for the parents' sanity. My friend mentioned the LR4 was a bit of a gas hog, at about 15 mpg tops. He about choked when he saw my trip mpg (31.4) which I got on the way to his house.

 

I suppose the LR4 is not much more aerodynamic than a brick...
Maybe it takes 500HP to shove a large brick.

 

carelm, if my memory is serving me well, the LR4 is the former Land Rover Discovery. It is smaller than the Land Rover and has a smaller, less powerful V8, but not the 510 chp 5 litre s/c motor of the larger "Land Rover", which by the way "Moves".

 

I was too polite to call bs on 500 hp. I checked the specs and it has 375 hp. Given that it weighs about 6000 lbs, the power-to-weight ratio is actually better for the S-Type since it weighs only 3700 lbs.

I think you're right about the LR4 being the replacement for the Discovery. As I understand it the LR2 is the Freelander replacement. The Evoque is a new model and the Range Rovers are in both naturally aspirated and supercharged varieties.

 

Only the Range Rovers get the S/C engines, the Land Rovers miss out.

Pity you guys can't buy the diesels stateside, a friend over here has the Turbo Diesel V6 Range Rover Sport, now that can move, and it gets >600 miles from a single tank of fuel.

 

The LR4 is a nice truck. I nearly purchased one this past year. It is the US version of the Discovery, this is true - the next evolution from the LR3. Definitely a superior truck to the LR3, although it's not going to win any drag races it does have ample torque for towing. Air suspension is another plus for those of us who like to off-road and haul stuff.

They are pricey new, seconhand however they are fairly reasonable. I'll likely add one to the stable in a few years once i get the bug again after i modify the heck out of the 2 Jeeps i have now.

There is just something about a LR in the snow....feels like a tank. I've had a few Rangies and I miss my beloved P38 quite bad, even though it was a "Saturday a month" truck - meaning you spent at least one Saturday a month fixing it.

Getting 15mpg out of that thing is doing quite well. I'm surprised it isn't more toward 12mpg to be honest.

I'd love it if they would bring an oil burner Stateside...all that torque! As long as it wouldn't require the urea fluid b.s. that a Benz/BMW require.

 

If the EPA find out about the actual emissions of NOx, particulates etc I reckon they'll not be allowed. I suppose they can't ban anything that's already allowed, though.

 

Arggh! Don't get me started on why we can't get the nice diesels stateside. As I understand it has to do with NOX emissions, but with some relaxation on the standards we could have a fleet of vehicles that really improve the fuel economy performance. As an example the new 2.2 Liter diesel in the XF gets about 50 mpg highway.

 

Yeah... but we have a vast number of people with severe health problems due to diesels. Are you sure you want those?

 

Certainly don't want the health problems, got enough smog as it is - a trip on any US highway and you'll see big rig after big rig blowing smoke all over the place. It's always irritated me that my passenger vehicles have to have emissions testing and pass those tests to be "inspected' (aka MOT) and therefore legal to drive on the road, whereas large commercial trucks just spew particulates and whatever else at will. Greasy palms of capitalism at work.

Anyway - I'm thinking if we would get an oil burner Landy over here, then it would have the urea injection and have the same setup as the BMW/Merc's where the owner gets a few warnings when the urea gets low and then if it runs out, the vehicle will not start until it gets the fluid. I think out of all of the diesel trucks (passenger), only the Ram with the Cummins TD doesn't require the urea system or something similar. Pretty sure Ford and Chevy's use the fluid although i might have one of those mixed up.

I don't know if the market for the LR4 here is strong enough for LR to jump through all the hoops though, probably not. They don't have the resources that the larger makers do to be able to offer the option and not take a beating on it (that's my guess).

If given a choice, i'd definitely pick a diesel LR4 over a gas version in a heartbeat, perfect for my uses.

 

Looks like the urea doesn't adequately reduce emissions, though.

 

A diesel-electric hybrid might a viable technical solution to handle the US 56 mpg mandate. Assuming that the diesel part might work 40-50% of the time the emissions issue would be mitigated.

 

Maybe. The NOx and particulates are far far worse than petrols so what happened here was the limits were just set to allow them.