RE: Range Rover Velar teased
Discussion
Doofus said:
Saw a velar yesterday. Completely unadorned of disguise or sticky tape, other than the words "PROTOTYPE VEHICLE" in white on the front bumper.
VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Exactly that.VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Also to save hysterics in the dealer when somebody goes running in, after having seen one in the flesh, only to be told they can't have one yet.
TooMany2cvs said:
Doofus said:
Saw a velar yesterday. Completely unadorned of disguise or sticky tape, other than the words "PROTOTYPE VEHICLE" in white on the front bumper.
VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Exactly that.VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Also to save hysterics in the dealer when somebody goes running in, after having seen one in the flesh, only to be told they can't have one yet.
Doofus said:
Saw a velar yesterday. Completely unadorned of disguise or sticky tape, other than the words "PROTOTYPE VEHICLE" in white on the front bumper.
VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Could be to give a heads up that you shouldn't assume all systems are functioning and validated? VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Ares said:
You never know if a car you buy is a dog, whether brand new or used (1 day to 10 years old).
You've still got a greater chance of a used car having problems. It's just common sense.
Though technically correct, you are missing my point with insistence that as remarkable as it is vexing.You've still got a greater chance of a used car having problems. It's just common sense.
I'm not saying used car will be more reliable that a new one. I'm saying buying new doesn't in any way guarantee problem free or reliable car.
If you buy a brand new car you do not have the benefit of other people testing that model out for you. I do agree as time go on during the life of given model its less and less of an issue as more and more cars are on the road.
So if you buy a model in the first or second year it's on the market, you're the beta tester. Then you indeed do not know if it's a dog or not. It will be you who will find out.
On the other hand, if a car has been on the market for a few years and it went on without major faults or people screaming their head off on the forums, all it takes is careful selection of a used example to minimize the risk.
That's all I'm saying.
Ares said:
Bladedancer said:
CooperS said:
How is it over simplified? It's trues dogs will continue to be dogs and those that are relatively reliable will have wear and tear on perfectly serviceable items which will mean more time spent in maintaining the car.
I explained in an earlier post. Essentially it doesn't take into account how the car was used or serviced which is a big part of its reliability.More time you say. If by that you mean that a service might take 4 hours instead of 2 then yes that is true as more items will need changing.
If you mean you'll have to visit the garage more often that that's a no for reasons I've already stated. Not to mention it's an generalization in its own right.
What you listed is wear and tear and depends greatly on driving style.
Oil you change every year unless you're one of those who will skimp on it 'cause mr salesman said its ok'.
Most filters you will change as well with each service.
Discs? Mine usually last for 80 to 100k. Pads for 30-40k. Heck I made a pair of rear tyres on a 330i last 40k. And never had to change a clutch on a car despite taking cars to over 150k miles and the clutches were still ok when I sold the car.
As I pointed out, which you keep ignoring, a lot of it is down to used car selection and how the car is maintained and used.
Ok, story time.
Some years ago I bought a 3 year old Mazda diesel.
As I later learned husband of a girl my wife works with bought the same car - same make and model, even the same trim level and color.
Except he paid around 70% of what I've paid. Did I overpay?
I knew the car I was buying had to have front tires changed and the timing belt so I factored that in. Wear and tear but going in with my eyes open. In 70k I've covered with that car only 1 thing went wrong - the EGR valve. And all that meant I had an ELM light on. Heck, it even passed MOT emissions with that EGR still in it.
He on the other hand got himself a 'bargain'. And so not too long after purchase he had to change the flywheel, clutch and shortly after that the turbo all of which was of great surprise to him.
Two cars that are almost the same. But in fact are completely different. And I'll bet the faults his car had on it would be there when he was buying it. But he either ignored them dazzled by the low price, or didn't know what to look for.
Bladedancer said:
Ares said:
Bladedancer said:
CooperS said:
How is it over simplified? It's trues dogs will continue to be dogs and those that are relatively reliable will have wear and tear on perfectly serviceable items which will mean more time spent in maintaining the car.
I explained in an earlier post. Essentially it doesn't take into account how the car was used or serviced which is a big part of its reliability.More time you say. If by that you mean that a service might take 4 hours instead of 2 then yes that is true as more items will need changing.
If you mean you'll have to visit the garage more often that that's a no for reasons I've already stated. Not to mention it's an generalization in its own right.
What you listed is wear and tear and depends greatly on driving style.
Oil you change every year unless you're one of those who will skimp on it 'cause mr salesman said its ok'.
Most filters you will change as well with each service.
Discs? Mine usually last for 80 to 100k. Pads for 30-40k. Heck I made a pair of rear tyres on a 330i last 40k. And never had to change a clutch on a car despite taking cars to over 150k miles and the clutches were still ok when I sold the car.
As I pointed out, which you keep ignoring, a lot of it is down to used car selection and how the car is maintained and used.
Bladedancer said:
Less? No. The same? Yes.
What you listed is wear and tear and depends greatly on driving style.
Oil you change every year unless you're one of those who will skimp on it 'cause mr salesman said its ok'.
Most filters you will change as well with each service.
Discs? Mine usually last for 80 to 100k. Pads for 30-40k. Heck I made a pair of rear tyres on a 330i last 40k. And never had to change a clutch on a car despite taking cars to over 150k miles and the clutches were still ok when I sold the car.
As I pointed out, which you keep ignoring, a lot of it is down to used car selection and how the car is maintained and used.
Ok, story time.
Some years ago I bought a 3 year old Mazda diesel.
As I later learned husband of a girl my wife works with bought the same car - same make and model, even the same trim level and color.
Except he paid around 70% of what I've paid. Did I overpay?
I knew the car I was buying had to have front tires changed and the timing belt so I factored that in. Wear and tear but going in with my eyes open. In 70k I've covered with that car only 1 thing went wrong - the EGR valve. And all that meant I had an ELM light on. Heck, it even passed MOT emissions with that EGR still in it.
He on the other hand got himself a 'bargain'. And so not too long after purchase he had to change the flywheel, clutch and shortly after that the turbo all of which was of great surprise to him.
Two cars that are almost the same. But in fact are completely different. And I'll bet the faults his car had on it would be there when he was buying it. But he either ignored them dazzled by the low price, or didn't know what to look for.
When I look at my car history there are two things that stand out. Firstly, I have a tendency to buy cars which have a stereotype of not being hugely reliable, TVRs, Jags and Range Rovers etc. But secondly I have had almost no reliability issues with these cars unlike so many others. What you listed is wear and tear and depends greatly on driving style.
Oil you change every year unless you're one of those who will skimp on it 'cause mr salesman said its ok'.
Most filters you will change as well with each service.
Discs? Mine usually last for 80 to 100k. Pads for 30-40k. Heck I made a pair of rear tyres on a 330i last 40k. And never had to change a clutch on a car despite taking cars to over 150k miles and the clutches were still ok when I sold the car.
As I pointed out, which you keep ignoring, a lot of it is down to used car selection and how the car is maintained and used.
Ok, story time.
Some years ago I bought a 3 year old Mazda diesel.
As I later learned husband of a girl my wife works with bought the same car - same make and model, even the same trim level and color.
Except he paid around 70% of what I've paid. Did I overpay?
I knew the car I was buying had to have front tires changed and the timing belt so I factored that in. Wear and tear but going in with my eyes open. In 70k I've covered with that car only 1 thing went wrong - the EGR valve. And all that meant I had an ELM light on. Heck, it even passed MOT emissions with that EGR still in it.
He on the other hand got himself a 'bargain'. And so not too long after purchase he had to change the flywheel, clutch and shortly after that the turbo all of which was of great surprise to him.
Two cars that are almost the same. But in fact are completely different. And I'll bet the faults his car had on it would be there when he was buying it. But he either ignored them dazzled by the low price, or didn't know what to look for.
My general reasoning is that most of my purchases have been known quantities. I've known who ran them or who maintained them and that has always been important to me along with the fact that the cars I buy have always been garages all their life and continue to be so under my ownership. And in addition I am a very mechanically sympathetic driver.
When I have bought a car from new it has tended to be a BMW and they've always had to go back under warranty for work that shouldn't have been necessary.
So, from my direct personal experience I could argue that buying used cars from perceived weaker marques is much more reliable than buying new from perceived reliable marques. But in reality I very much suspect that is a load of b
ks and that what it really boils down to in my case is that I buy cars that I know have been looked after and in turn I continue to do so. For example, I would never consider buying a TVR that hadn't been garaged all its life and owned by someone who had driven it like a hand build sports car and not a contract plumber late for a job. Doofus said:
Saw a velar yesterday. Completely unadorned of disguise or sticky tape, other than the words "PROTOTYPE VEHICLE" in white on the front bumper.
VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
That was parked at Chesford grange hotel on friday night (i think) it was definitely a landrover of some sort but had a smoother longer nose, looked really nice to me.VA66 reg, near the factory. What's the point of the sticker, other than to draw attention?
Ares said:
J4CKO said:
Couple of weeks back, was coming past Manchester Airport, through the tunnels and Spotted a Velar, thought it looked nice, then another, then another ! Counted twenty or so, anyone know what was going on ?
Event at Mottram Hall. I saw them too.On the way to newcastle, saw a few transporters loaded up with some discovery's, some range rover evoques, but quite a few velars. Saw about three of these transporters, all containing velars. Then, to my luck, there was a dark maroon/red/dark lipstick coloured velar driving in the left lane, no number plates except for those red DVLA plates. Covered in a thick film, probably protecting the car while testing it. No cowlings or anything, looked very very good. It will be nice to see a change on the road from those horrid evoques, these really have changed the game and would definitely tempt someone out of a 5/6 series as the looks are just that good! Would have loved to snap a pic but was going a bit too fast to take one.
Next door neighbour is on the launch team for Land Rover and so will be nice to see the prototype on his front lawn. He had a Evoque convertible prototype during the launch on that one, was only on a 16 plate.
Next door neighbour is on the launch team for Land Rover and so will be nice to see the prototype on his front lawn. He had a Evoque convertible prototype during the launch on that one, was only on a 16 plate.
Ares said:
Yes. And this is getting tedious. A used car will still have a greater chance of needing to visit a garage than a new one, wear and tear or failures/breakdowns (see bold above); and older cars will be more susceptible to mechanical issues than identical brand new ones.
Yes it is. I understand what you mean and what your point it.
You fail to understand what I mean or what my point is and insisting on a single-dimensional view of the subject.
I think it's time to call it a day.
Edited by Bladedancer on Tuesday 11th July 07:21
DonkeyApple said:
So, from my direct personal experience I could argue that buying used cars from perceived weaker marques is much more reliable than buying new from perceived reliable marques.
You could, but that is not what I'm arguing.I'm saying buying a used car that has proven to be reliable doesn't have to be any more risky than buying new *if* you know how to choose a used car and are going into it with your eyes open instead of counting on the miraculous bargain.
Bladedancer said:
DonkeyApple said:
So, from my direct personal experience I could argue that buying used cars from perceived weaker marques is much more reliable than buying new from perceived reliable marques.
You could, but that is not what I'm arguing.I'm saying buying a used car that has proven to be reliable doesn't have to be any more risky than buying new *if* you know how to choose a used car and are going into it with your eyes open instead of counting on the miraculous bargain.
Problem with buying used is that you never have perfect knowledge.
When my Father in law bought his, he got a BMW mechanic to check it over, it was clean, known bugs were clear, but he still gave the overrider that you don't know how it has been looked after/drive/cared for, and if it was perfect, and not that new, you have to question why it is being disposed of! It turned out to be a real Friday-afternoon car.
When my Father in law bought his, he got a BMW mechanic to check it over, it was clean, known bugs were clear, but he still gave the overrider that you don't know how it has been looked after/drive/cared for, and if it was perfect, and not that new, you have to question why it is being disposed of! It turned out to be a real Friday-afternoon car.
Ares said:
Problem with buying used is that you never have perfect knowledge.
When my Father in law bought his, he got a BMW mechanic to check it over, it was clean, known bugs were clear, but he still gave the overrider that you don't know how it has been looked after/drive/cared for, and if it was perfect, and not that new, you have to question why it is being disposed of! It turned out to be a real Friday-afternoon car.
Indeed but this was why I was saying that the cars I buy are from sources I know rather than an unknown car being checked over. My cars have been cars which have been either owned by people I know or maintained by people I know. It also saves money on the upfront as they get to dispose of a car instantly and without comeback. When my Father in law bought his, he got a BMW mechanic to check it over, it was clean, known bugs were clear, but he still gave the overrider that you don't know how it has been looked after/drive/cared for, and if it was perfect, and not that new, you have to question why it is being disposed of! It turned out to be a real Friday-afternoon car.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff