Land Rover Range Rover!

[Cookie Monster]

They need to make this, minus the Ohlins and sell it for M3 money:

[CALL_911]

And proceed to sell like 2 of them.

[Cookie Monster]

Chris Harris said it's better than the C63.

If you want an AWD sports sedan, there's nothing else that would compare to it at M3 (or slightly less) money. I think they could sell a good amount of them.

[AltinD]

I'm not sure you've ever actually been in a newer Volvo.  Flimsy doors?  Buddy, time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid.

Newer ... you mean like those displayed at the showroom in December 2012 when I visited? And yes, the doors of the XC90 are.

[CJ]

They absolutely aren't.  I've been in countless XC90s.  The doors are rock solid. 



Also, got to see some new Range Rovers today.  Classy.

[Madman]

Falling sales?  Have you seen the sales of the S60?  XC60?  They're doing much better in the hands of the Chinese.  Not what they used to be?  Of course not.  They're better. 

Yes, the S60 and XC60 are doing well.  But what about the rest of their lineup?  C30 and S80 sales are dead in the water, the current C70 is nowhere near as popular as the original, the XC90 is so old the owner's manual is hand written on parchment and the V40 isn't even sold here at all.

Two semi-successful models does not make for a viable dealer franchise.

[TurboDan]

The LR4 has increasingly become my fav in their lineup. I like the RR though, and I really like the outgoing one. I think it's the most classy of the mega-expensive SUVs.

I think LR is making some major brand management mistakes with the Range Rover name, though. RR should be reserved to their top of the line. RR Sport, ok, a bit of a stretch but I'm ok with it.  But why does the Evoque need to be the "Range Rover Evoque"?  I think it's a big mistake, and a dangerous path to go down from a branding perspective.  The hood of the Evoque even says "Range Rover", give me a break it should say "Land Rover" like the LR4.

I think the eventual plan is to take the LR brand a bit downmarket, thus Range Rover could absorb a pricey – yet not outrageously priced – vehicle like the Evoque.

Personally, I don't think it should've been called a Range Rover when it's less expensive than the LR4 and only a few grand more expensive than a well-equipped LR2, but I can see how it fits into some of their long term thinking.

[Lebowski]

I think the eventual plan is to take the LR brand a bit downmarket, thus Range Rover could absorb a pricey – yet not outrageously priced – vehicle like the Evoque.

Personally, I don't think it should've been called a Range Rover when it's less expensive than the LR4 and only a few grand more expensive than a well-equipped LR2, but I can see how it fits into some of their long term thinking.

They're long term thinking sounds stupid and ultimately will erode the brand equity of both LR and RR.

[TurboDan]

They're long term thinking sounds stupid and ultimately will erode the brand equity of both LR and RR.

Possibly, but being a niche manufacturer (albeit with a large fan base) is risky in and of itself, especially with rising worldwide fuel prices and the SUV craze on the downswing, at least in the short term.

If they launch the next Defender in several variants, including a no frills mainstream one priced a little more than a Wrangler, I don't see it hurting brand equity too much. Defender is almost a brand within itself, and it's not going to attract the wealthy executives, affluent suburban soccer moms or the general "keep up with the Joneses" crowd that the other models do. Do I think they should start making cheap crossovers like the Jeep Compass, or something like that? No. But one off-road model that isn't loaded with luxury features and competes with arguably the only other true off-road non-pickup in the market today is something I'd roll the dice on.

[Submariner]

the XC90 is so old the owner's manual is hand written on parchment

[Submariner]

They're long term thinking sounds stupid and ultimately will erode the brand equity of both LR and RR.

If the new RR were an inferior product I might agree, but the new RR is nothing of the sort. 

[2o6]

You know, I don't understand why Cadillac insists on keeping the Escalade total crap.

[Eye of the Tiger]

You know, I don't understand why Cadillac insists on keeping the Escalade total crap.

The people who buy it don't care how good it actually is, as long as they rolling like they ballin.

[TurboDan]

The people who buy it don't care how good it actually is, as long as they rolling like they ballin.

They're coming out with a new one for 2014 (as a '15 model), along with the rest of GM's large SUVs, I believe. 2012 was its worst sales year ever, and I'm sure 2013 will be worse.

That's a long time, but until the '13 came out, the Range Rover was 10 years old. Granted, there were significant refreshes, but still.

[Lebowski]

If the new RR were an inferior product I might agree, but the new RR is nothing of the sort. 

I'm talking about taking the RR brand downmarket ala branding the evoque a RR.  That cheapens the brand no matter how good the true RR is.

[MrH]

They're coming out with a new one for 2014 (as a '15 model), along with the rest of GM's large SUVs, I believe. 2012 was its worst sales year ever, and I'm sure 2013 will be worse.

That's a long time, but until the '13 came out, the Range Rover was 10 years old. Granted, there were significant refreshes, but still.

+1

[CJ]

Can someone explain why GMT900 trucks/SUVs are cracking/disintegrating their dash boards? It's mildly disturbing.

[MrH]

Can someone explain why GMT900 trucks/SUVs are cracking/disintegrating their dash boards? It's mildly disturbing.

  Got a link to something?

[CJ]

http://tahoe-cracked-dash.m.webs.com/site/mobile?dm_path=%2Findex.htm&fw_sig_api_key=522b0eedffc137c934fc7268582d53a1&fw_sig_tier=0&fw_sig_is_admin=0&fw_sig_premium=0&fw_sig_permissions=none&fw_sig_session_key=90f3e79884de7400a0dc4891b024b95c89155b81b87de70b1f2a52dc67e91b58-96061472&fw_sig_time=1360257810196&fw_sig_url=http://tahoe-cracked-dash.webs.com/&fw_sig=82ca934c0588c733928759669d256797&fw_sig_access_token=ff871d03f2b1f9df21364a3738a5ec97b140a760&fw_sig_permission_level=0&fw_sig_social=1&fw_sig_site=96061472&fb_sig_network=fw#1201


http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/08/gmt-900-gmc-chevy-vehicles-subject-to-frequently-cracking-dashboards/

There are countless other links online and videos on YouTube.

[Madman]

Old Volvos were notorious for cracked dashboards.  A custom made dash cover is much cheaper than a new dash!

[Eye of the Tiger]

Old Volvos were notorious for cracked dashboards.  A custom made dash cover is much cheaper than a new dash!

And they look like some half-assed attempt to cover a cracked dash.

[CJ]

Old Volvos were notorious for cracked dashboards.  A custom made dash cover is much cheaper than a new dash!

15 years later, not 2. 

[Madman]

15 years later, not 2. 

That's true, but this is GM we're talking about, so a certain amount of shittiness is expected! 

[CJ]

But from a $50k+ vehicle?  No.

[TurboDan]

But from a $50k+ vehicle?  No.

Eh, My ex-gf's XLR originally sold for like $90K and it had the same creeks as every other GM dash. Nice car and cool to drive, but there's a certain level of disappointment when a piece of cheap plastic around the nav screen starts getting loose on a car that, in certain trims, sold for six figures.

[CJ]

When did you guys call it quits?

[Submariner]

Can someone explain why GMT900 trucks/SUVs are cracking/disintegrating their dash boards? It's mildly disturbing.

Because they're poorly made cars?

[CJ]

Because they're poorly made cars?

We already knew this.

[2o6]

Because they're poorly made cars?

I wouldn't say poorly made; most of the hardware is pretty sturdy and I'd trust it over something british.



The interior, however, is absurdly cheap and poorly made. It does not feel expensive. It does not feel nice at all.

[Soup DeVille]

Can someone explain why GMT900 trucks/SUVs are cracking/disintegrating their dash boards? It's mildly disturbing.

You can blame a firm called Plastech that molded them and is no longer in business.

Basically, the chemistry that GM paid for in the plastics was not what they were actually getting, and it lacks some component additive that supposed to stop UV radiation damage.