Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is the Range Rover Sport the apex in arsehole wheels ?

Is the Range Rover Sport the ultimate in arsehole wheels ?

  • Yes

    Votes: 82 56.9%
  • Yes

    Votes: 51 35.4%
  • Yes

    Votes: 51 35.4%
  • Yes

    Votes: 55 38.2%
  • No, I have an Audi and I claim that title

    Votes: 13 9.0%
  • I dont know as I do not drive

    Votes: 23 16.0%
  • I live in the country and I find it useful for the 2 frosts we get each year

    Votes: 9 6.3%
  • Comedy Option

    Votes: 15 10.4%
  • Fuck you, you snotty middle class cycling shitbag

    Votes: 39 27.1%

  • Total voters
    144
For a start, I’d rather have my Yeti than a Range Rover. And fully specced it cost £20k new (albeit 9 years ago now), versus how much for a low-end Range Rover sport?
Even Jeremy Clarkson liked those. How is it off road?
 
No. None of the wankermobiles.
He’s trolling.

Bimble’s 4wd thread is the one to pick if he’s serious. Or plenty of others. Why else pick the only thread on the boards that's specifically about how shit Range Rovers are and the dicks that own them to say 'I'm thinking of buying a Range Rover'?!
 
Last edited:
Even Jeremy Clarkson liked those. How is it off road?
It's a 4x4 vehicle. It has an "off-road" button -- you push it then the computer does various things. In the ice, it basically drives itself -- just steer. In the mud, it sorts out how much power to each wheel etc.
 
So what do you suggest is a good vehicle for driving off-road in snow, on the motorway and on sand?

The most off-road capable are the Nissan Pathfinder or Patrol, Toyota Land cruiser, Mitsubishi Shogun. I regularly drive my Pathfinder on 300 mile motorway trips at 80mph and find it very comfortable. Its fantastic for 2 week camping trips to the Alps with 3 kids. It does however, as all the vehicles in this class do, burn fuel.

Something like an Outlander will do all the off-road stuff you need, be comfortable on long road trips and burn a lot less fuel.
 
I’ve driven in deep snow, mud, and beaches. What you say is true, to a point, but a 4x4 will do it better than a cheap hatchback, even with winter tyres.

And almost any 4x4 will do it better than a range rover. Toyota Land Cruiser has been the official benchmark for a long time but there must be at least ten other cars that are as good in terms of quality and reliability in that class.
 
The most off-road capable are the Nissan Pathfinder or Patrol, Toyota Land cruiser, Mitsubishi Shogun. I regularly drive my Pathfinder on 300 mile motorway trips at 80mph and find it very comfortable. Its fantastic for 2 week camping trips to the Alps with 3 kids. It does however, as all the vehicles in this class do, burn fuel.

Something like an Outlander will do all the off-road stuff you need, be comfortable on long road trips and burn a lot less fuel.

Someone I know has the PHEV Outlander and it seems really nice. Also like many Hyrbids it's nipper then it's specs might suggest. Also eerie how quite it is on full electric mode.
 
I have no problems with the car model itself, but look at the fucking state of this...

christ.jpg


I'm tempted to email the image to Mercedes-Benz. I reckon they might try to forcibly repossess the car.
 

Not terrific when the off road going gets really rough because of relatively shallow exit/entry angles and wading depth compared to the RR Sport. You can fix that with aftermarket bits though.

They do have by far the best powertrains in the class though. The 3.0 petrol double-vanos turbo is the sweet spot, unless you're going to be towing. It has a lot of interesting tech in it including a mechanical fuel pump and the intercooler inside the intake plenum.
 
In the modern world, it’s increasingly unclear what a “premium” marque really means. The technology is shared, the manufacturing process of all companies is to tolerances of less than a micrometer, they’re all broadly as reliable as each other (except for Jaguar Land Rover, who are worse rather than better). You don’t even get better dealer service these days. It seems increasingly to just be a competition about who can make the plushest interior.
 
In the modern world, it’s increasingly unclear what a “premium” marque really means. The technology is shared, the manufacturing process of all companies is to tolerances of less than a micrometer, they’re all broadly as reliable as each other (except for Jaguar Land Rover, who are worse rather than better). You don’t even get better dealer service these days. It seems increasingly to just be a competition about who can make the plushest interior.

My best mate has the Seat version of our car, we have driven each other’s cars and by god you can tell the difference. Whether that difference is worth the extra £’s the Audi costs over the Seat I guess depends on how much spare money you have.
 
My best mate has the Seat version of our car, we have driven each other’s cars and by god you can tell the difference. Whether that difference is worth the extra £’s the Audi costs over the Seat I guess depends on how much spare money you have.
What do you find the difference to be?
 
What do you find the difference to be?

Everything feels more solid. I know the metal is the same thickness and that they tune the sound the doors make when they close and so on, but the way it feels on the road feels more solid. Dunno why, can’t describe much more than that, I’m not really Clarkson... Also it has more toys and that. And ultimately on a long journey I arrive feeling less tired than when I did the same in ‘lesser’ cars that I used to own. Add to that the feel of the materials used in the cabin and, to me, it feels worth it. I feel a Bentley or that level of car is as much a waste of dough as a Seat owner thinks an Audi is though, so it seems that these things are relative.
 
Everything feels more solid. I know the metal is the same thickness and that they tune the sound the doors make when they close and so on, but the way it feels on the road feels more solid. Dunno why, can’t describe much more than that, I’m not really Clarkson... Also it has more toys and that. And ultimately on a long journey I arrive feeling less tired than when I did the same in ‘lesser’ cars that I used to own. Add to that the feel of the materials used in the cabin and, to me, it feels worth it. I feel a Bentley or that level of car is as much a waste of dough as a Seat owner thinks an Audi is though, so it seems that these things are relative.
Most of what you’ve said there (possibly even all) is referring precisely to the “plushness of the cabin” I mentioned above as being the last meaningful difference between marques.
 
Most of what you’ve said there (possibly even all) is referring precisely to the “plushness of the cabin” I mentioned above as being the last meaningful difference between marques.

So?

And plushness of the cabin doesn’t account for how solid it feels on the road, which was my first point.
 
So?

And plushness of the cabin doesn’t account for how solid it feels on the road, which was my first point.
It kind of does, though. It’s all about how it’s transmitted to you in the cabin.

it’s fine to feel that the plushness is worth the money. But it’s different to the old days, where the actual mechanics were better in more expensive cars
 
It kind of does, though. It’s all about how it’s transmitted to you in the cabin.

Obviously, that’s where I experience my car. But handling etc., dunno, it’s nice, you’re welcome to come and have a thrape if you want.

And maybe back in the day pricier cars had better reliability, I don’t really remember, or have any benchmark as no one had a flash motor (though my dad did once look after a customer’s Ferrari for a week and it had 180mph on the speedo. My car has that too, I can fit a fridge-freezer in mine...)
 
Back
Top Bottom